Ukc Final Tcs Report

Assistance with the Implementation of an Under Keel Clearance System For Torres Strait
Prepared for: The Australian Maritime Safety Authority (AMSA) Client Reference: AMSA No. 790/36186
March 2007
Thompson Clarke Shipping Pty Ltd Suite 105, Level 1 97 Pacific Highway North Sydney NSW 2060 Australia Tel: +61 2 9929 9468 Fax: +61 2 9955 7812 e-mail: admin@thompsonclarke.com.au
Implementation of an Under Keel Clearance System for the Torres Strait
Australian Maritime Safety Authority
All Rights Reserved. No part of this document may be reproduced, transmitted, stored in a retrieval system, or translated into any language in any form by any means without the written permission of the Australian Maritime Safety Authority
Thompson Clarke Shipping Pty Ltd
Page i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 2 3 4 4.1 4.2 5 5.1 5.2 5.3 6 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 6.5 6.6 6.7 7 7.1 7.2 7.3 8 8.1 8.2 8.3 8.4 9 9.1 9.2 9.3 9.4 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Background Potential Benefits of a Real-Time UKC System in Torres Strait UKC Systems Under Consideration UKC System Inputs Operational Models Risk Management Cost Benefit Conclusion BACKGROUND CONSULTATION THE UNDERKEEL CLEARANCE CONCEPT Under keel Clearance and Associated Factor Allowances The Real-Time or Predictive UKC Concept THE USE OF REAL TIME UKC SYSTEMS AND REGIMES General Australia / New Zealand Operational Experience Overseas Operational Experience REAL-TIME UKC SOFTWARE APPLICATIONS AND VENDORS General OMC International Voyage Management Systems (VMS) Key Strengths of the OMC and VMS Real Time UKC Systems: Other Real Time UKC Software Systems Portable Pilotage Units Ground Truthing Approach to Integrity and Robustness ENDEAVOUR RIVER VOYAGE WEIPA TO CAIRNS General Weipa The Torres Strait Transit INPUT DATA QUALITY General Hydrographic Data Metocean Data Vessel Considerations TYPICAL MET-OCEAN DATA COLLECTION EQUIPMENT General Wave Rider Buoys Acoustic Doppler Current Profilers (ACDPs) and RETWAC Other Devices 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 4 5 6 6 7 8 8 8 9 13 13 13 18 23 23 25 29 33 33 33 33 36 36 36 44 46 49 49 49 50 53
Page ii
10 10.1 10.2 10.3 10.4 10.5 10.6 10.7 10.8 10.9 10.10 10.11 10.12 11 11.1 11.2 11.3 11.4 11.5 11.6 12 12.1 12.2 12.3 12.4 13 14 14.1 14.2 14.3 14.4 14.5
ECONOMIC ANALYSIS POTENTIAL ECONOMIC BENEFITS DERIVED FROM INCREASING DRAUGHT General Approach Principle Traffic Flows in the Torres Straits. Vessels Limiting Criteria Distances Through the Torres Straits Economic Issues for Consideration Major Trades Using Torres Straits and the Economic Benefits Tankers Container Vessels Other Trades Potential Economic Benefits Tidal Windows OPERATIONAL MODELS AND GOVERNANCE General Primary Options Consideration Variants in Both Primary Options One or More Private Sector Managed Services Option Single AMSA Managed Service Option Potential Operational Issues RISK ASSESSMENT General Risk Assessment process Risk Identification, Analysis and Evaluation Risk Treatments COMMON LAW LIABILITY OF AMSA TO SHIP OWNERS BROAD BASED COST ESTIMATES General Hydrographic Surveying Met-Ocean Data Monitoring System and Network Real-Time UKC System (S/Ware and H/Ware) Overall Cost Summary
54 54 54 55 57 57 58 59 62 62 62 62 64 65 65 65 65 71 76 81 83 83 84 88 90 91 93 93 93 94 98 100
APPENDIX A: AHO CONTROLLING DEPTH ACCURACIES APPENDIX B: RECORDED TIDAL RESIDUALS FOR THE TORRES STRAIT REGION APPENDIX C: DATA ON TORRES STRAITS TRANSITS APPENDIX D: CONSOLIDATED LIST OF RISKS APPENDIX E: LEGAL ISSUES SUMMARY
Page iii
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this document is to report on the findings of a consultancy undertaken by Thompson Clarke Shipping (TCS) for the Australian Maritime Safety Authority (AMSA) in accordance with the requirements of AMSA RFT No. 790/36186 to assist in the implementation of an Under Keel Clearance (UKC) system for the Torres Strait region.
1.1
Background
Compulsory pilotage through Torres Strait was implemented on 6th October 2006 and applies to all vessels over 70 metres in length and all loaded tankers, chemical tankers and liquefied gas carriers. Previously only vessels that opted to carry a pilot were limited to a maximum draught of 12.2 m when transiting the Torres Strait. This restriction still applies under the compulsory pilotage rules and applies to all vessels carrying a pilot. The minimum UKC that now applies to piloted vessels transiting Torres Strait is 1 m up to 11.9 m and 10% of draught for vessels having a draught of 11.9 m 12.2 m.
1.2
Potential Benefits of a Real-Time UKC System in Torres Strait
This report examines the implications of introducing a UKC system that, if implemented, may allow some relaxation of the current draught restriction of 12.2 m by adopting a real-time approach to measuring UKC. Such an approach has two potential benefits: a greater understanding of the margin of navigational safety when transiting Torres Strait when coupled with the introduction of compulsory coastal pilotage; the potential for economic benefit to the users of the Torres Strait by permitting increased cargo uplift.
1.3
UKC Systems Under Consideration
Despite various overseas UKC/Pilotage support systems being examined it became evident that Australia leads the field in the development of dedicated UKC systems: OMC International (OMC), a Melbourne based company that specialises in the development and implementation of real-time UKC systems. Voyage Management Systems (VMS), a subsidiary of Torres Industries the parent company of Australian Reef Pilots based in Brisbane.
However, whilst both systems provide basically the same output in terms of UKC calculation, OMC has developed tried and tested systems that are currently in use in 12 ports around Australia and New Zealand, whereas VMS does not have an operational real-time UKC system as yet, although VMS report that their system is fully developed. Much of the information provided by OMC and VMS is Commercial-in-Confidence and care has been taken throughout this report to maintain this confidentiality.
1.4
UKC System Inputs
The location of Torres Strait at the confluence of the Arafura Sea and the Coral Sea creates enormous complexity in the tidal streams and currents experienced, but which are not generally present at other port locations where a real-time UKC system is in operation. The accuracy of the output from a real-time UKC system is wholly reliant on the integrity of the inputs to the system. This report highlights that some of the data relating to existing depth survey tolerances
Page 1
and various Metocean data may not be sufficiently precise to be relied upon with confidence in the implementation of a real-time UKC system for Torres Strait. Of particular concern is the potential uncertainty in relation to water depth resulting from the large survey tolerances associated with the most recent surveys of the Torres Strait and the charts currently in use. These tolerances, if introduced as a component of a UKC calculation, have the potential to significantly affect the accuracy of the output, calling into question the validity of the predicted UKC. Before any UKC system could be considered for implementation better tolerances for hydrographic and metocean data need to be achieved and the system extensively trialled in the field.
1.5
Operational Models
Two primary operational models, with variations, for a real-time UKC system are discussed and compared and comment is made on the legal liability implications for AMSA of both AMSA operated and privately operated systems. The majority of stakeholders consulted during the preparation of this report favour a real-time UKC system controlled and operated by AMSA in conjunction with the Reef VTS.
1.6
Risk Management
The risk associated with not introducing a real-time UKC system relates to the continuing uncertainty that currently exists of actual under keel clearance due to the imprecise nature of a static under keel clearance calculation that may result in a touch bottom or grounding incident. The principal risk associated with the introduction of a real-time UKC system is a vessel touching bottom or grounding as a result of inaccurate output data, improper use of the system or failure of the system. Mitigation strategies for these risks are discussed at length in the report.
1.7
Cost Benefit
The capital cost of implementing a real-time UKC system in Torres Strait is estimated to be of the order of $1M - $2M with an annual licencing and maintenance cost of about $1M. Should the introduction of a real-time UKC system allow for a draught increase the economic benefits of introducing such a system are estimated to be $10.15M and $13.3M for 12.5 metre and 12.8 metre draughts respectively.
1.8
Conclusion
In relation to the implementation options for a real-time UKC system within the Torres Strait, as identified in this report, the Implementation of an AMSA managed UKC service as an Aid to Navigation (AtoN) provides a means to justify the implementation of a UKC System by AMSA by virtue of AMSAs role in providing AtoN facilities and services; justify the integration of the UKC service within REEFVTS by adding the monitoring of the UKC component to the position reporting information that is already monitored in the REEFVTS area; best enable AMSA to obtain a more definitive measure of the existing safety margin within the current mandated draught limit; provide a sound basis for future changes to mandated draught limits (either up or down) based on accurate measures of UKC, including a potential draught increase that is conditional upon an AMSA managed Common Use UKC service; and best mitigate risks and issues associated with any other implementation option (either private sector or AMSA draught increase intent) .
Page 2
In addition there may be some economic benefits if it is found that the introduction of a real-time UKC system can provide the necessary confirmation that draughts deeper than the current 12.2 metres can be achieved Although this report shows that there could be some significant benefits from the introduction of a realtime UKC system in Torres Strait both from a safety and an economic viewpoint, focus must be concentrated on the shortcomings related to the real time information currently available to those wishing to transit the Torres Strait. The report identifies that more reliable survey and metocean data needs to be available for input into a real Time UKC system to maximize the accuracy of the predicted real-time UKC system output Before AMSA could endorse the introduction of a real-time UKC system in Torres Strait there needs to be far greater confidence in the accuracy of the inputs into such a system with extensive field testing and validation of any system required prior to a final decision being made for full implementation.
Page 3
BACKGROUND
The Torres Strait is an important waterway that is used for International sea transport as defined by the United Nations Convention on Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). The Torres Strait route for all but shallow draught vessels is through the Prince of Wales (PoW) Channel that has a datum of about 11.3 metres although the western approaches through the Varzin and Gannet Passages have limiting depths of 10.5 metres and 10 metres respectively. The eastern approaches to PoW are via the Inner Barrier Reef route or via the Great North East Channel. Following the inclusion of the Torres Strait Region in an extension of the Great Barrier Reef Particularly Sensitive Sea Area (PSSA) as approved by the IMOs Environment Protection Committee in July 2005, it was also agreed that the region would introduce compulsory pilotage as an additional protective measure. Compulsory pilotage was implemented on 6th October 2006 and applies to all vessels over 70 metres in length and all loaded tankers, chemical tankers and liquefied gas carriers when transiting Torres Strait Pilotage Areas A and B. Traditionally approximately 60% of vessels that use Torres Strait have used a pilot; this equates to about 2,000 vessels annually. Until the introduction of compulsory pilotage only vessels carrying a pilot were limited to a maximum draught of 12.2m when transiting the Torres Strait. This restriction now applies to all vessels carrying a pilot and the minimum under keel clearance that applies to such vessels is 1m up to 11.9m and 10% of draught for vessels having a draught of 11.9m 12.2m. The Torres Strait is not necessarily the limiting draught area for vessels using the strait as Weipa, for example, has draught limitations of less than 12.2m for ships loading bauxite at certain states of the tide. The shipping industry generally has been seeking some relaxation of the current 12.2m draught restriction that applies to the Torres Strait as it has been felt that the range of tides that are experienced in the strait allow for deeper draught vessels to transit at certain times subject to safe minimum Under Keel Clearance (UKC) being maintained. At present all UKC calculations are done on a Static basis whereby a minimum under keel clearance is declared by the regulatory authority, in this case the Australian Maritime Safety Authority (AMSA), and ships masters are then responsible for ascertaining when their particular vessel is able to commence a transit through the strait, ensuring that their timing and transit speed allows for the minimum UKC to be maintained throughout. It is thought that the introduction of a real-time Under Keel Clearance system may give the opportunity for vessels to transit the Torres Strait with a draught in excess of 12.2 metres at certain times as the calculation of UKC is based on more scientific principles using real-time or near realtime (up to 24 hours prior to transit) information provided from a number of sources such as tide gauges, wave measuring devices and GPS. In addition the system will calculate other draught components extrapolated from historical met-ocean data and vessel characteristics. This report examines all aspects of the possible implementation of a real-time UKC system including the available systems, the associated equipment, the risks, governance and the possible benefits, both from a navigational safety and commercial perspective.
Page 4
CONSULTATION
In order to understand the implications of introducing an Under Keel Clearance system a number of relevant stakeholders in the maritime industry were consulted as part of the information gathering process. These included: Shipping Industry Bodies Australian Shipping Association, Shipping Australia Limited Torres Straits Users Associated Steamships Pty Ltd, Rio Tinto, Comalco, QAL, BP, Ship Masters Pilotage Providers Australian Reef Pilots, Torres Pilots Regulatory Authorities Australian Maritime Safety Authority, Maritime Safety Queensland, REEFCENTRE at Hay Point Port Authorities Ports Corporation of Queensland Local Interest Groups Torres Strait Regional Authority (TSRA) Government Agencies Hydrographic Office, Bureau of Meteorology, National Tide Centre UKC System Developers OMC, Voyage Management Systems (ARP) In addition to the above a TCS consultant travelled on the following vessels: o British Beech from Dalrymple Island through the Great North East Channel and Prince of Wales Channel to Booby Island to view the operation of the Personal Pilotage Unit (PPU) developed by Voyage Management Systems. Maersk Dexter from Swanston Dock, Melbourne down Port Phillip Bay to Queenscliff to view the DUKC software developed by OMC. Endeavour River from Weipa to Cairns to experience the transit of Torres Strait by a vessel at the maximum permitted draught of 12.2 metres.
o o
The views expressed and information provided by the various stakeholders and the accounts of the onboard trips undertaken are discussed within this document.
Page 5
4
4.1
THE UNDERKEEL CLEARANCE CONCEPT Under Keel Clearance and Associated Factor Allowances
Under Keel Clearance (herein referred to as UKC) refers to the distance between the keel of a vessel and the sea floor. For the purpose of determining the tidal window for vessel movements within restricted routes and channels, waterway authorities (ie. generally in ports) have traditionally adopted fixed or deterministic rules which govern the minimum UKC required. The designated minimum UKC permitted for such routes and channels is theoretically derived from a summation of permissible allowances (i.e. tolerances or margins) associated with each of the potential influencing factors that determine bottom clearance. The basis for determining the size of each factor allowance is generally empirical observation given the difficulty in assessing true values. Within a static determination therefore, the permissible allowance for each factor represents a margin for error intended to accommodate a reduction in UKC up to the most unfavourable or worst case operational conditions, whereby the conditions include environmental circumstances (e.g. oceanic and meteorological conditions), vessel dimensions and stability, actual vessel speed and acceleration, and survey or channel profile accuracy. For the purpose of this report, the total allowance or Gross UKC can be diagrammatically represented as follows:
Provided by OMC during the consultancy
Figure 1: Factor allowances associated with a Gross UKC Calculation. In addition to the conditional factor allowances identified in Figure 1, most real-time UKC calculations include a Bottom Clearance, which refers to the remaining clearance allowance required after all other conditional factor allowances are removed. The Bottom Clearance allowance is based on internationally accepted guidelines, and is intended to be a representation of the Net Under Keel Clearance value as defined in PIANC1.
UKC for Large Ships in Maritime Fairways with Hard Bottoms, a report on a working group of the Permanent Technical Committee II, Permanent International Association of Navigation Congresses, 1985. Thompson Clarke Shipping Pty Ltd Page 6
4.2
4.2.1
The Real-Time or Predictive UKC Concept

General
As opposed to a static UKC requirement, the concept of real-time or predictive UKC is based on an ability to reduce a permitted UKC (thereby permitting an increased draught and/or widened tidal window) through a reduction in uncertainty associated with the individual factor allowances. This reduction in uncertainty is achievable through an ability to utilise computer modeling to more accurately determine the effect of known conditions (in real-time or near real-time) on changes in draught throughout a transit. In addition, the concept of a predictive UKC regime assumes that in general, there is a readily accessible extra depth of water (in the form of un-utilised allowances) that can be safely utilised. While the stochastic nature of waves and tide imply that it is theoretically possible for an event to occur that is more extreme than static allowances, in general the actual depth of water under the keel will be somewhat greater than that determined using the static rule. This enables the actual safe draught and/or available tidal window to be improved beyond that which is dictated by the static UKC regime. It is on the basis of the above that real-time or predictive UKC provides potential benefit, the extent of which for any nominated waterway being primarily dependent on the following: the extent to which the uncertainties in individual factor allowances can be accurately determined and quantified, and the extent to which unused UKC allowances currently exist in typical vessel transits as a result of the static UKC regime currently adopted.
4.2.2
Risk and Safety Implications
Static regimes can be described as variable risk systems (i.e. unresponsive to the particular conditions that pose a high risk of grounding). These conditions include both environmental conditions (for example, tidal phase anomalies, tidal residuals and bathymetric uncertainty) and those relating to the load state of the vessel. In contrast, a real-time UKC system can be described as a constant risk system, because it accounts specifically for the conditions of the day and effectively applies a constant risk criterion to determine the safety of the proposed passage. When compared with a static rule, a real-time UKC system can be described as having a greater appreciation of risk, given the intrinsic characteristic of having to assess and quantify the extent of unknowns associated with each influencing factor on UKC, and thereby create an increased awareness of the inherent risk associated with each. A static regime is therefore a blunt compromise between economics and safety it must be conservative enough to prevent frequent groundings, yet optimistic enough that trade still benefits from the waterway in terms of tonnage throughput, without regard to the conditions of individual passages. By adapting to daily conditions, a real-time UKC system will ideally outperform a static regime economically on most occasions and on balance (on the assumption that the static regime is based on factor allowances that account for the worst case conditions). Simultaneously, it can outperform a static regime in terms of safety by identifying the safety and management risk inherent in any proposed passage at the time of passage, and enable that risk to be independently monitored.
Page 7
5
5.1
THE USE OF REAL TIME UKC SYSTEMS AND REGIMES General
Although the concept of real-time UKC has been in existence within the maritime industry for a number of decades, the true operational application of systems and associated management regimes on a world scale is relatively limited. However, as reported in maritime publications and journals, an interest in concept assessment and provisional trials of associated systems and technology has been rapidly increasing in the last decade. Australia and New Zealand have a relatively high proportion of ports currently operating with a realtime UKC regime and associated management software system. This unique characteristic with respect to other countries of the world is a direct result of the development and marketing activities of Melbourne based OMC International (herein referred to as OMC) and its founder Dr Terry OBrien, who is currently recognized on a world scale as a leading expert on the practical application of UKC technology and related systems. The underlying demand for consideration and adoption of real-time UKC technology is based on the growing economic demand for efficiency in shipping transport, and the increased recognition that existing UKC regimes are potentially restricting bottlenecks in many ports and coastal waterways. Specific demand side influencing factors include: Its attractiveness as an alternative (or complement) to the high capital cost associated with dredging, particularly in a climate of port capacity expansion (thereby obtaining similar benefits at a lower cost). As a means of better managing the waterways authorities risk in response to incidents, or at least enforcing parties to undertake a greater assessment of associated risks. As an example, a realtime UKC system and associated regime was mandated by the Maritime Safety Authority (MSA) at a port in New Zealand in response to a grounding incident. As an additional value added VTS advisory service provided by a port based vessel traffic management authorities. Based on information available to TCS during the period of this consultancy, all existing operational implementations of a real-time UKC regime to date have been in port environments. Although there have been a number of provisional field trials intended to derive a more accurate measure of vessel dynamics while transiting significant channels and major waterways beyond ports, there is no definitive real-time UKC implementation to date outside of port environments and/or immediate port approaches. Therefore in relation to Torres Strait, there is no directly comparable open waterway that operates today based on an implemented real-time UKC regime.
5.2
Australia / New Zealand Operational Experience
There are 8 fully operational implementations of real-time UKC systems and associated passage regimes within Australian waters, all of which are implemented in port environments and associated port approaches. These include: Port of Hay Point/Dalrymple Bay Port of Fremantle Port of Brisbane Port of Newcastle Port of Dampier Port of Geraldton Port of Bunbury
Page 8
Port Hedland In addition, similar systems are currently being installed in the Port of Melbourne and the Port of Geelong. In New Zealand, there are currently three fully operational implementations of UKC systems at the following: Port of Whangerai Port of Taranaki Port of Napier A fourth New Zealand installation is currently being finalized in the Port of Gisborne. All of the above 11 real-time UKC system installations and the three in progress installations are based on the OMC DUKC computer based software product. As reported by OMC, the DUKC product has proven itself to provide positive benefits to draught and/or tidal windows when compared with the fixed rules previously provided at each of the above port locations. This claim is based on 13 years of DUKC operational experience in Australia and New Zealand port environments. As quoted in documentation provided by OMC, the waterways authorities associated with the original implementations of OMC DUKC product (i.e. those customers who have operated the system for the longest period) have estimated the economic benefits achieved to date as: Hay Point: $60m pa over 12 years Port Hedland: $240m pa over 9 years Port of Dampier: $50m pa over 9 years. While it is difficult to comment on improvements in operational safety (given that the implementation of any real-time UKC system is based on reducing unutilized factor allowances), it can be stated that there has not been a known grounding incident in any of the ports since the DUKC product has been installed. As also noted in documentation provided by OMC, an estimated 30,000 vessel transits world wide have occurred in ports under the advice of the OMC DUKC since initial installation. There are no available statistics however (or even broad range estimates) as to the proportion of these movements which would not have been permitted under the former fixed UKC rules.
5.3
5.3.1
Overseas Operational Experience

General
This section is not intended to be a comprehensive investigation into all operational installations throughout the world, but rather a general desktop review of current status. As identified in the desktop review, there are a number of customized real-time UKC solutions that have been developed in a handful of ports around the world, most of which are used to facilitate passage planning in the local port environment. Each of these systems varies in respect of their scope, capacity, and method of application. Typically these solutions have been developed by local waterways authorities and other stakeholders in conjunction with local research bodies (such as the US Army Corps of Engineers, local waterways authorities, local universities etc). In general however, these systems have tended to remain operational in the port of origin only, having been developed locally, with little interest in commercializing the systems on the world market.
Page 9
5.3.2
US Activity
Cape Canaveral, Florida and Kings Bay, Georgia, US

Primarily intended for use by large naval vessels only, both Cape Canaveral and Kings Bay provide real-time UKC capability through the implementation of a real-time UKC system referred to as the Environmental Monitoring and Operator Guidance System (EMOGS). As an operational real-time UKC forecasting system, EMOGS was developed to provide safe transit of deep draught vessels through shallow entrance channels. As a risk-based system used to avoid vessel grounding and to minimize channel depth requirements, EMOGS can predict the estimated UKC during a specified transit for any vessel in question. EMOGS uses bottom survey data, statistical and measured wave and tidal data, and calculated ship motions to assess the risk of a vessel or submarine touching the channel bottom. EMOGS was developed by the US Naval Surface Warfare Centre under contract to the US Army Corps Engineer Research and Development Centre. EMOGS was the basis of another real-time UKC system known as CADET (Channel Analysis and Design Evaluation Tool), also undertaken by the same developers. Although CADET is a more sophisticated probabilistic tool, its application is principally as a channel design tool, and therefore empirical parameters such as meteorological tides are not factored into the calculation.
PORTS Physical Oceanographic System, US

While not a real-time UKC system in itself, a system of note in a wide range of ports throughout the US is PORTS. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA's) Physical Oceanographic System (PORTS) is characterized as a navigation safety tool. PORTS improves the safety and efficiency of maritime commerce and coastal resource management through the integration of real-time environmental observations, forecasts, and other geo-spatial information; and distributes such information as a decision support tool to pilots and other maritime users via VHF/UHF, VTS AIS, or a range of alternate means such as web access, telephone, wireless phone services, etc. PORTS information is updated with real-time measurements every six minutes.
Figure 2: General Layout of a PORTS System. PORTS began in 1991 in Tampa Bay as a demonstration project to prove the value of real-time tide and current information to the marine navigation community. PORTS is available in a variety of sizes and configurations, each specifically designed to meet local user requirements and to take into account real geographic and hydrologic differences between waterways. It uses off-the-shelf system
Thompson Clarke Shipping Pty Ltd Page 10
components where-ever possible, resorting to custom designs only where necessary. The largest PORTS installation to date comprises approximately 30 separate met-ocean instruments (San Francisco Bay). The smallest consists of a single water level gauge and associated meteorological instruments. These smaller PORTS installations are referred to as PORTS Lite. Regardless of size, each PORTS installation provides information that allows shippers and port operators to maximize port throughput while maintaining an adequate margin of safety. PORTS measures and disseminates observations and predictions of water levels, currents, salinity, and many meteorological parameters needed by the mariner to navigate safely. PORTS collects an integrated set of environmental information and makes it available in real-time to ships entering a waterway or port. PORTS is a critical component of NOAA's comprehensive navigation safety solution. The information derived from PORTS is available as an input to UKC calculations, whether that be a true real-time UKC management system, or an alternate more limited passage planning system using simplistic UKC adjustments. In reference to information provided in a USCG publication2, in response to growing concerns over the UKC issue, the United States Coast Guard issued national UKC planning guidance that allowed port authorities to establish local UKC criteria within the bounds of a national guideline. In general, the national guideline required determination of UKC utilizing the real-time information available through PORTS. Depending on the calculation methods used however, the result can be little more than a more formal execution of the older empirical approach, with simplistic addition and subtraction of estimated allowances for differing allowance factors. However, the benefit of PORTS even in that situation is that it assists in making the calculation as accurate as possible. PORTS is a federally funded service in the US (with local communities contributing to capital costs for installation of port based met-ocean instrumentation), with strict controls on data output based on the use of a supervisory system (the Continuous Operational Monitoring System or CORMS), that confirms the integrity of the information disseminated. It is also noted that in the NOAA document referenced above, comment is made in relation to the Australian OMC DUKC system and the benefits it could provide in relation to real-time UKC in US Ports with real-time data derived from PORTS. Reference was also made to trials that were being undertaken at the time of the OMC DUKC in the Port of New York/New Jersey.
5.3.3
European Activity
Port of Rotterdam, Netherlands

Probably the most significant current implementation of a real-time UKC system within Europe is that which is implemented in the Port of Rotterdam. For vessels with a draught of greater than 17.4 meters, the submitted plan of entry must detail movement times on the basis of a probabilistic UKC method. In general, this is undertaken using an existing computer model known as HARAP (HARbour APproach). HARAP is a probabilistic model and was developed by AVV Transport Research Centre (part of the Dutch Ministry of Transport, Public Works and Water Management) for use within the local port waters. While HARAP is a fully operational system, it is understood the AVV Transport Research Centre is currently undertaking a project to re-develop HARAP based on concerns in relation to calculated safety levels derived from the system3. HARAP is only operational in the Port of Rotterdam, and is not available as a commercial product.
Real-time Tide and Current Data Systems in United States Ports, Implementation Status Safety and Efficiency Needs Expansion Plan, A Report to Congress, July 2000. 3 Admittance Policy Tidal Bound Ships, Design of a Probabilistic computer model for determination of channel transit risks to seaport, AVV Transport Research Centre, November 2005. Thompson Clarke Shipping Pty Ltd Page 11
Harwich Haven, UK
Harwich Haven is located on the east coast of the United Kingdom in the North Sea. The port is accessed by approximately 30km of approach channel. The Harwich Haven Authority is responsible for navigational safety in the channels. The Port of Felixstowe is the largest container port in the UK and a major user of the Harwich channels. It was reported by OMC that the Harwich Haven Authority is a DUKC client.
MarNIS Maritime Navigation and Information Services

The MarNIS group is a consortium of experienced European partners and subcontractors who are chartered to find innovative global and European solutions for maritime operations in European waters. The primary objectives of MarNIS as documented is to undertake projects based that improve maritime safety and the protection of the environment improve maritime security, and improve maritime efficiency and reliability. Two of the key projects currently being undertaken in Cluster Four of the MarNIS project which have the potential to influence or direct real-time UKC requirements in European ports and waterways include: [WP4.2] Development of a Port Operational Approach and Docking Support System (POADSS). The POADSS will facilitate ship passage planning by providing modelling and monitoring of vertical as well as horizontal navigation to a Portable Pilot Unit (PPU). [WP4.1] Integration of the Real-Time Passage Planning information from the POADSS back to a VTS system for real-time passage monitoring, in order to provide an independent monitor of passage safety. TCS also understands that OMC has been contracted as a non-European consultant as part of these projects, with trials to date in relation to the above having been based on the DUKC PPU Product. In addition, as part of the POADSS, OMC has been contracted to provide a DUKC PPU for the Port of Lisbon in Portugal.
Hymedis Vlaamse Banken and Zege

Hymedis Vlaamse Banken and Zege Systems are European versions of the NOAA PORTS system in the US. Hymedis is a distribution centre for hydro-metro information located in Vlissingen. Two monitoring networks (Vlaamse Banken and Zege) send up-to-date information on water level, wind, current, etc to this centre on a continual basis. This information is processed and via wireless and fixed communication offered to the pilots, official vessels and quay stations active in the area as a basis of real-time met-ocean data for navigational or other purposes. Hymedis is a joint Belgian-Dutch initiative of the Administration for Waterways and Seaways (AWZ) and Public Works and Water Management (RWS). The project is managed by the Management and Operating Team of the Scheldt Radar Chain (BET). Over time, Hymedis is intended to develop into the successor of the RWS rapid measuring system currently deployed. The rapid measuring system will remain in use until 2008. Hymedis clients support the rapid measurement format on their RS232 output. The Hymedis concept is to facilitate access to up-to-date information available on the central Hymedis server in Vlissingen. Hymedis clients can periodically pluck information from the database. Communication between clients and the Hymedis server can be via the Internet or (for mobile users and associated applications) via GPRS.
Page 12
6
6.1
REAL-TIME UKC SOFTWARE APPLICATIONS AND VENDORS General
As part of this study, TCS undertook direct consultation with each of the only two existing potential Australian vendors of real time UKC software systems. These providers being: OMC Corporation (OMC), Melbourne; and Voyage Management Systems (VMS), Brisbane. Although both vendors expressed willingness to participate in consultation for this study, both providers were overtly guarded in the information they were willing to provide in relation to their respective products. Details in relation to how the respective algorithms in each system differed was identified as confidential and proprietary, therefore limiting the ability for TSC to quantify respective differences in terms of predicted UKC results for each system. Irrespective of the above, given that the study was not intended to be a detailed risk based statistical analysis of the probabilistic modeling undertaken by available vendor systems, the information derived in consultation with each vendor was considered sufficient for the purpose of this report.
6.2
6.2.1
OMC International
General
OMC was founded by Dr Terry OBrien in 1987. It was established as a maritime engineering company to act as a commercial vehicle for the OMC DUKC product, and its related variants. Today, the OMC team consists of 20 staff including engineers, software developers and administrative personnel able to develop, deploy and support OMC products and services throughout the world. The expertise of Dr Terry OBrien and OMC, and the application and performance of the DUKC product has received significant worldwide attention, and is continuing to do so both in European and American markets. Even on the basis of a rudimentary Internet search, reference to the OMC DUKC product and related research by Terry OBrien is well noted in various papers, working group reports, and official commendations from all over the world. Terry OBrien is also a regular advisor and participant in international forums and associated bodies (e.g. PIANC) in matters related to his expertise in UKC determination.
6.2.2 General
Product Description
In general, DUKC is a near real-time under-keel clearance management system to assist in vessel transits which have tidally restricted sailings on import or export ships. DUKC integrates sophisticated numerical modeling with real time met-ocean measurements and hydrographic survey data to determine vertical ship movement and UKC for transit through a restricted waterway. The DUKC product is a stand alone software application capable of operating on an optimized PC or laptop. For each section of a transit, each UKC factor allowance (see Figure 1) is individually determined based on the forecast environmental conditions, channel configuration, vessel dimensions, load state and speed. UKC for maneuverability margin (MM) and for bottom clearance (BC) are separately calculated at discrete intervals (e.g. one minute intervals) for the entire route of the transit. As quoted by OMC, DUKC is stated to differ from a static rule UKC regime by the following:
Each UKC factor allowance is scientifically determined based upon the actual conditions of the day, vessel dimensions, stability and speed and channel configuration. The allowance made for each UKC factor can be as large or small as is required for the conditions of the day, vessel dimensions, stability and speed and channel configuration. Users of the DUKC are provided with a clear representation of the net minimum UKC for BC and for MM for the entire transit. Pilots can see what the minimum net distance between keel and sea floor will be for the entire transit, which is unknown with a static rule. Other factors not readily identifiable in the above include ship interaction effects, and in particular, the changing ship dynamics when two vessels pass within a restricted waterway. The OMC DUKC product is currently available in a number of different variants, with tailored functionality depending on client requirements. Those OMC DUKC product variants which are most applicable to this study are as identified below: Short Term Sailing Planning DUKC From approximately 30 hours prior to traversing the restricted waterway this DUKC variant can be used to determine sailing windows and draughts. These calculations are based upon mathematical models of environmental conditions driven from real-time measured inputs. In Transit Planning DUKC The DUKC Navigator is a pilot carry-on system (i.e. PPU) which receives GPS inputs of position and speed and calculates a UKC for the remainder of a transit (beyond current time) while in the restricted waterway. The pilot has the option of selecting speeds in each section of the transit in which case the system will return the resultant UKC. Alternately, optimum speeds for each section that will ensure adequate UKC can be returned. The DUKC Navigator enables pilots to shorten transit times through port channels to the minimum possible without compromising safety; however the DUKC Navigator gives the pilot the ability to clearly see the implications of navigational decisions on UKC expectations. In addition to the above, there is a Long Term Sailing Planning product known as Q-DUKC which is generally intended for voyage planning earlier than 30 to 36 hours from the restricted waterway. While this product variant uses the DUKC methodology to determine UKC requirements and thus plan sailing times, the environmental information used is based upon probabilistic estimates of conditions rather than real-time measurements. Depending on the institutional and operational management regime adopted for a Torres Strait real time UKC system, this variant of the product is not likely to be applicable. Other variants of the DUKC product that are not applicable to this study relate to channel design and channel maintenance applications.
Accuracy and Safety

The way in which each UKC factor allowance is accounted for in any DUKC implementation will depend on the unique situation of the waterway, including the local bathymetry, availability of live environmental data and local hydrodynamics. However, provided the accuracy and precision of each real time input is known, the DUKCs overall accuracy and precision will also be known. Where uncertainty is greater for certain factor components due to less available data (or data accuracy), this is accounted for in DUKC through the use of greater allowances in that factor. Therefore, safety is not compromised irrespective of the level of accuracy (i.e. tolerances) associated with input variables, however the effectiveness of the system in permitting increased draught or tidal windows will be reduced where increased tolerances on factor variables exist. Over time, as more data becomes available and uncertainty is reduced, DUKC will improve yield without compromising safety.
Page 14
6.2.3
Applicability to the Torres Strait Region
General Response
As expressed during consultation, OMC perceive significant value in the implementation of a real time UKC system within the Torres Strait region, with the primary benefit being an increase in safety based on the characteristic of their DUKC product to better quantify and manage the risk of grounding for a specific vessel on a specific day (ie. based on actual vessel data and load state, and actual met-ocean data within the Strait). OMC perceive the factors to be considered at Torres Strait as no different in principle to the factors considered at all other OMC DUKC installations. Features such as strong tidal gradients and associated currents, tidal phase anomalies, atmospheric effects, long transits, vessel passing, complex morphology, bathymetric survey uncertainty and wave response are being successfully modeled at each location.
A Potential UKC Operational Scenario

The operational scenario identified in consultation with OMC for the Torres Strait is that of a regulator based Common User System administered by the shore based waterway authority (i.e. AMSA/MSQ) on behalf of all vessel transits. The primary purpose of which is to promote increased safety (through increased quantification and management of risk), with the ability for increased economic benefits to be achieved if safety permits. The functional objective of the Common User System depicted is that of a UKC Gateway, whereby a potential management/operational scenario is as follows: AMSA/MSQ (i.e. REEFREP) seek passage plans from masters up to 36 hours prior to the Torres Strait transit, and provide advice to masters in relation to available gateway windows. Immediately prior to transit through the gate, a final passage plan would be submitted by the pilot for confirmation against the gateway DUKC calculation. Once the transit commences within the gated region, AMSA/MSQ discharge normal monitoring duties (as per the REEFREP area), with real time access by the pilot to the DUKC via the DUKC PPU for navigational support. As identified in the previous section, the DUKC Navigator is a pilot carry-on PPU which gives the pilot the ability to clearly see the implications of navigational decisions on UKC through the remainder of the restricted waterway transit (thereby enabling better management of UKC risk). The functional objective identified above is therefore clearly a gate-keeping role requiring compliance of all transits within that dictated by the DUKC system. The use of the on-board PPU ensures that the DUKC processing system is available as a tool for the on-board pilot if changes to navigational decisions are required. There is no intention or perceived need within this operation for on-shore navigational assistance by the waterways authority. Based on the above functional objective, the operational scenario does not provide passage planning beyond a maximum 36 hour window, even though OMC provide a DUKC product variant that could undertake that function. Passage planning advice beyond a 36 hour window is more of a commercial application as opposed to the proposed safety/risk management focus identified above. Industry would however be able to procure a long range DUKC product from OMC, or utilise a competitors product, if long range UKC planning is commercially desirable. The general architecture and related infrastructure associated with this operational scenario can generally be described as follows: A shore based DUKC processing system that is operated by AMSA/MSQ staff (i.e. REEFREP).
Page 15
The implementation of various real time meteorological and oceanographic data collection devices positioned at strategic locations throughout the Torres Strait region to best identify the influencing factors on UKC. All such devices would need to be integrated via communications infrastructure or services back to the shore based DUKC processing system. Utilisation of an on-board PPU based on the DUKC Navigator product, with communications from the PPU to the shore based DUKC processing system. The means of communication could be AIS, satellite, or any alternate form of wireless communications service.
Supporting Real Time Data Collection Devices

OMC emphasized during consultation that the task of identifying type, number and location of real time data collection devices is not trivial, and requires detailed investigation and field trials (potentially) to adequately determine key influencing factors, and therefore the extent to which devices are required to ensure factor changes are readily captured and incorporated into the UKC processing system. OMC perceive that this is a vendor task based on a vendors proprietary modeling system, and is part of the preparatory works which they would normally undertake with the client in all installations. Typical activities include: reviewing relevant technical literature, including past environmental studies of the region; acquiring historical environmental measurements for climate analysis and environmental modelling; acquiring bathymetric data from the region for the purposes of analysing bathymetry and morphology; conducting environmental modelling and validation of that modelling (which may require temporary deployment of measuring instruments at a number of locations); and identifying technical alternatives of differing cost (including quantification of the relative implications on UKC for the different technical alternatives where applicable).
6.2.4
Port of Melbourne Voyage and OMC DUKC PPU Demonstration
On 26th October 2006 a trip was undertaken onboard the container vessel Maersk Dexter to observe the operation of the OMC real time Under Keel Clearance system. The vessel was boarded in No 1 West berth Swanston Dock in Melbourne and the OMC technician set up the system that consisted of the following hardware: IBM Notebook computer Wireless modem USB GPS
Page 16
Figure 3: OMC Equipment Setup and PPU Screen Shot The system was set up with a chart display of Port Phillip Bay using a proprietary chart software package, Qastor, with an additional display at the bottom of the screen showing the waypoints that would be used during the pilotage to Port Phillip Heads, an expected speed profile for the pilotage and the corresponding graphical indication of the expected measure of comfort in Under Keel Clearance the vessel would be expected to encounter during the passage. The measure of comfort is the amount of under keel clearance the vessel would experience above the sum of the assumed errors used in the modeling and is indicated on the display as a number of green bars; the assumed errors input is set at 25cm and represents the safety factor. On leaving the berth the vessel started to track on the chart display by receiving real time information from the GPS whilst simultaneously a blue line indicating vessel speed started to track across the DUKC display that was receiving real time information from a number of tide gauges and a waverider buoy positioned at Port Phillip Heads. OMC advised that the information received from the wave rider buoy was not really relevant to the passage within Port Phillip Bay as there was no wave motion experienced within the bay due to the benign weather experienced during the passage. During the passage the OMC technician demonstrated how changes in the variables could influence the shape of the green graph to the extent that, should the safety factor be breached then the graphical display turns from green to red and a warning indicator alerts the user. Alteration of the variables making up the UKC of the vessel can then be fed manually into the system until the graph achieves an all green display that indicates the under keel clearance remains within the limits set. It was demonstrated that the UKC screen could be shown separately from the chart screen for the purposes of recalculation using a more user friendly display. The pilot onboard had not seen the OMC DUKC system in operation so the OMC technician ran him through the basics of how a pilot could utilize the information for safer passage planning/making as well as using the modeling features of the system to examine unexpected and/or what-if scenarios such as: Departure Delays Vessel overloading Speed restrictions such as engine problems or limited visibility Changes to the speed profile Pronounced changes in metocean conditions The pilot welcomed any initiative that would provide a more scientific approach to UKC than currently exists.
Page 17
6.3
6.3.1
Voyage Management Systems (VMS)

General
Voyage Management Systems is a company that is owned by Torres Industries (i.e. the parent company of the Australian Reef Pilots), and has been created to both develop and market the KeelClear real time UKC management system. Voyage Management Systems Pty Ltd (herein referred to as VMS) was registered in May 2006. The KeelClear software and its associated algorithms were developed in conjunction with expertise from Curtin University, in particular Dr Kim Klaka (as Director for the Centre for Marine Science and Technology) and Dr Tim Gourlay (a Research Fellow with the Centre for Marine Science and Technology). Both individuals have a significant track record in the field of marine science, including analytical and experimental ship hydrodynamics, naval architecture and wave mechanics.
6.3.2 General
Product Description
KeelClear has been developed by VMS primarily as a real time UKC system for use by Marine Pilots while transiting deep draught ships through the Torres Strait (i.e. as a pilotage tool). As identified by VMS in associated product brochures, additional benefits arising from this system include: voyage planning capabilities to shipowners and operators of draught potential for Torres Strait transits for any day, up to twelve months in advance; and a risk assessment for any particular vessel in terms of safe transit and cargo carrying capacity for any day, up to twelve months in advance. KeelClear integrates sophisticated numerical modeling with real time met-ocean measurements and hydrographic survey data to determine vertical ship movement and UKC for transit through a restricted waterway. The KeelClear product is a stand alone software application developed on MATLAB (a high-level language and interactive environment that enables faster performance of computational tasks), and is designed to operate on an optimized laptop or desktop PC. VMS stated that their software system incorporates key PIANC recommendations on hull to sea bed clearance. After allowing for the squat of a moving vessel, the requirements incorporated are: soft sea bed a minimum clearance of 0.5 metres hard sea bed a minimum clearance of 1.0 metres. Product information sighted during consultation identified the following as the possible real time meteorological and hydrographic inputs to KeelClear: Tide height Tide stream Wave height Wave direction Wave period Salinity Atmospheric pressure
Page 18
Wind speed Wind direction Highly accurate position Independent Heading Speed over the ground Position relative to other vessels Rate of turn
Accuracy and Safety

In the absence of clarification by VMS, it is assumed that the issue of accuracy and safety within the KeelClear product is similar to that of the OMC DUKC product, given that both are real time UKC systems based on the concept of real time risk quantification. Where uncertainty is greater for certain factor components due to less available data (or data accuracy), the software system is anticipated to make greater allowances in that factor. Therefore, safety is not compromised irrespective of the level of accuracy (i.e. tolerances) associated with input variables, however the effectiveness of the system in permitting increased draught or tidal windows will be reduced where increased tolerances on factor variables exist.
6.3.3
Applicability to the Torres Strait Region
General Response
VMS perceive significant value in the implementation of a real time UKC system within the Torres Strait region on the basis of better quantification and management of risk for a specific vessel on a specific day. However, the basis by which VMS perceive this benefit be obtained is through the application of a UKC software product as a dedicated pilotage tool as opposed to a general waterways management tool, thereby applying the enhanced safety benefit only to those individual vessels that are utilizing a UKC software tool for pilotage.
An Alternate UKC Operational Scenario

The operational scenario identified in consultation with VMS is that of an industry based Individual User System for real time UKC pilotage tools. The Individual Use System would be administered by the national safety regulator (AMSA), but only in terms of providing an Acceptance Regime. Therefore, any real time UKC pilotage tool could be used, as long as its underlying safety control and management aspects have been verified as appropriate by AMSA through the Acceptance Regime. The functional objective of the Individual User System scenario as identified in consultation with VMS is to enable the application of real time UKC regime within the Torres Strait if and only if the vessel is being piloted with the use of an accepted real time UKC pilotage tool. As part of this regime, any individual vessel that transits the Straits without such a tool would be expected to do so on the basis of the current static UKC arrangement. As a result, the operational scenario does not involve AMSA in day to day activities associated with a vessel transit, nor does it provide any active role in monitoring vessel transits. As suggested in consultation with VMS, the safety regulation responsibilities of AMSA would be fulfilled through the Acceptance Regime that would apply to all real time UKC pilotage tools utilised in the region. Based on the above, an example of this potential operational scenario utilizing the VMS KeelClear UKC pilotage tool would be as detailed below:
Page 19
Step 1:
Voyage planning via the KeelClear website.
Through accessing the website, the industry (i.e. shippers) will be able to ascertain the maximum draught for a vessel transiting the Torres Strait for any day of the year, up to twelve months out. By entering the proposed transit date, the generic hull form of the vessel, and the direction of transit, the shipper will be given a maximum draught graph displaying a seven day range based upon the input date. Considerable safety factors are built in to this stage of the process to allow for particular underwater hull forms, maneuvering speeds and future weather and tide variables. This tool will be particularly useful to Liner Trade operators who will be able to plan up to 12 months in advance the likely cargo that can be carried in a Torres Strait transit on any particular day. Step 2: Individual Vessel Risk Assessment.
The individual vessel risk assessment is carried out by marine pilots using the KeelClear software to ascertain the safe draught and safe transit speeds of a particular vessel, taking into consideration its unique underwater hull form. This step in the process is also a useful planner for shippers of bulk cargoes considering charter options on a number of different vessels and is a valuable tool in assessing the cargo carrying capacity of a particular vessel on any given date, up to twelve months out. This risk assessment also becomes a key component of the Passage Plan presented to the ships Master. Step 3: Booking Confirmation
The Booking Confirmation process takes place up to 7 days out from actual transit and takes into account some real-time inputs that may affect the keel clearance and therefore safe draught of the vessel. This is essentially a finessing process to calculate the safe draught of the vessel even whilst loading cargo. Likely inputs would be weather systems in the Pacific and Indian Oceans that could impact on tide heights in the Torres Strait. All safe draught calculations before this process have been very conservative with large safety margin built in. It is anticipated that the Booking Confirmation process will usually marginally increase safe transit draught, or at worst confirm previous draught advice. It will also firm up on required time of arrival at Pilot Boarding Ground for transit. Step 4: Real Time Transit of Torres Strait
The transit of the vessel will be undertaken by an AMSA licensed deep draught pilot, who has been appropriately trained and licensed in the use of the KeelClear pilotage tool and associated shore based pilotage support services. The pilot will utilise a Portable Pilotage Unit (PPU), which informs the pilot of his required position and speed against the Passage Plan. As a backup and redundancy feature the pilot uses a navigation system which operates completely independently of the ships equipment (including the gyro compass). However, the system can interface with the ships AIS should it be necessary. Each KeelClear transit will be monitored by a dedicated pilot ashore that is part of the overall service. This pilot will have independent navigation and KeelClear software, plus access to the ships AIS data. The shore pilot will also be in communication with the ships pilot. Therefore in the event of an onboard system failure the shore based pilot can offer advice to the ship or talk the ships pilot through the entire transit The general architecture and related infrastructure associated with the KeelClear processing system utilised in above example can generally be described as follows:
Page 20
A shore based KeelClear processing system that is operated and monitored by a dedicated shore based KeelClear Pilot. It is anticipated that the shore based pilot will be an ARP pilot. The implementation of various real time meteorological and oceanographic data collection devices at strategic locations throughout the Torres Strait region so as to best identify the influencing factors on UKC (refer next section). All such devices would need to be integrated via communications infrastructure or services back to the shore based KeelClear processing system at Thursday Island. Utilisation of an on-board PPU, which is used to provide lat/long position data and SOG (speed over ground) as inputs to a dedicated on-board laptop (also provided by the pilot). The lat/long and SOG data is relayed to the shore based KeelClear processing system via a wireless communications link from the laptop (eg satellite communications, AIS, GPRS, etc), and used as an input into the KeelClear processing system to derive a real time forecast of UKC for the remainder of the transit. This forecast is compared with the passage plan originally provided, and any issues in relation to restrictive UKC, for which alerts are provided back to the pilot if necessary. The on-board laptop therefore provides the pilot with an ECDIS navigation display using the PPU data, as well as associated KeelClear alarming and KeelClear UKC forecast charts. The onshore pilot is essentially providing a monitoring and fallback service in the event of a communications failure which will result in a loss of KeelClear information on-board, as well as a loss of the position and SOG input into the shore based KeelClear processing system. The use of a pilot ashore enables provision of navigation advice (via a secondary voice radio communications) in relation to UKC forecasts for the remaining transit, based on manually entered position and speed updates.
Supporting Real Time Data Collection Devices

While OMC noted a requirement for additional modeling and investigation to permit determination of type and location of real time data collection devices required within the Torres Strait region for DUKC operation (and associated cost/performance tradeoffs), VMS stated that their requirements were known based on their pilotage experience, and has already been documented and detailed to AMSA (for operation with the KeelClear processing system).
6.3.4
Torres Strait Voyage and VMS System PPU Demonstration
A transit of the Great North East Channel and the Torres Strait was undertaken aboard the tanker British Beech that was in ballast on 18th October 2006. The purpose of the trip was to observe the PPU developed by Voyage Management Systems a subsidiary of Torres Industries who also manage the Australian Reef Pilots. The TCS consultant and one of the Australian Reef Pilots boarded the vessel off Dalrymple Island, the boarding station for vessels approaching the Torres Strait through the Great North East Channel. The PPU carried by the pilot was contained in an orange Pelican hard case, to protect it in transit, containing: A field tough Panasonic notebook computer A pair of GPS aerials connected by a measured wire trace, capable of being rail mounted (a pair of industrial spring loaded clips are included in the pack) A rechargeable battery pack A built in wireless modem
Page 21
Figure 4: VMS Portable Pilotage Unit GPS Setup It became evident that only the Qastor chart software was able to be demonstrated in real time as the UKC component of the PPU was not able to pick up any real time information due to lack of signal generators in the Torres Strait. A demonstration was given of how the KeelClear system would display a UKC calculation gained from real time information and how the system could be used to do a predictive calculation based on changing input parameters. The UKC component of the VMS system sits ready in the toolbar of the Qastor chart display as both software packages are Windows based, so the pilot can call up the UKC display at will. Should a real time calculation indicate that the minimum UKC safety margins are breached at any point during the transit the computer will indicate a warning to the pilot who can then do a predictive calculation to remove the alarm condition.
Figure 5: VMS UKC Display and Qastor Chart Display The VMS UKC display shows a predictive display that shows: The Static UKC as a green dotted line The dynamic UKC as a blue pecked line The minimum UKC as a red solid line Should the dynamic UKC fall below the red line the display indicates a Transit Unsafe in red and the pilot is warned to take corrective action by altering the input parameters until a Transit Safe condition is displayed. Under the UKC graph an additional matrix displays: Speed over the Ground as a pink dotted line Speed through the water as a red pecked line Tide in metres as a blue solid line
Page 22
As the system was unable to be demonstrated in real time it is not known if the dynamic display is somehow animated.
6.4
Key Strengths of the OMC and VMS Real Time UKC Systems:
In the absence of a detailed statistically based analysis of the underlying algorithms, the purpose of this section is to identify the key strengths of the two Australian vendor systems as reported by the developers/vendors of the systems. The key strengths of the OMC DUKC system as reported by the vendor include: The system has been developed as a waterways management system (as opposed to a pilotage tool), and therefore includes the effect and implication of passing vessels on UKC for each vessel. The product is packaged in various product variants for different applications within the industry, including the application of an on-board PPU for pilotage assistance. The architecture of the product includes the ability for an on-board PPU to receive real time metocean data direct from the real time met-ocean data network in the event of a communications failure between PPU and the centralised DUKC processing system located at the on-shore waterways management centre. The product is a proven commercial system with 12 fully operational implementations over 13 years, and a track record of appropriately 30,000 incident free transits.
The key strengths of the VMS developed real time UKC system as reported by the vendor include: Developed by pilots as a pilotage tool, therefore intended as a differentiator of pilotage services within a competitive and contestable pilotage regime. Includes the provision of an on-shore pilot to provide remote pilotage services to account for the loss of real time UKC data on-board in the event of a communications failure between the onboard KeelClear display and the shore based KeelClear processing system. Utilises Seaway calculations especially developed by Delft University to better predict ship motion in shallow water (however details of Seaway were not provided to TCS based on IP concerns).
6.5
6.5.1
Other Real Time UKC Software Systems

General
Based on the desktop investigation undertaken by TCS for this study, which is consistent with the documented outcome of at least one other similar desktop study in recent years4, it can be concluded that there is a very limited number of real time UKC software systems that are of the type, quality and scope demonstrated within the installed and operational DUKC systems, and reported to be achievable in the KeelClear system (as yet unproven in an operational capacity). As already identified in a previous section of this report, there are a number of customized real time UKC solutions that have been developed in a small number of ports around the world, most of which are limited in their commercialization given that they have been developed by authorities for their own use. Three that were already mentioned and discussed included: 1. Environmental Monitoring and Operator Guidance System (EMOGS): As an operational real time UKC (UKC) forecasting system, EMOGS was developed to provide safe transit of deep
Development of an UKC System for Hong Kong, by Curtin University, June 2005. Page 23
2.
3.
draught navy vessels and submarines through shallow entrance channels. EMOGS is operational in Cape Canaveral, Florida and Kings Bay, Georgia; and was developed by the US Naval Surface Warfare Centre under contract to the US Army Corps Engineer Research and Development Centre. Channel Analysis and Design Evaluation Tool (CADET): A subsequent development of EMOGS by the same developers. Although CADET is a more sophisticated probabilistic tool than EMOGS, its application is principally as a channel design tool, and therefore empirical parameters such as meteorological tides are not factored into the calculation. HARbour Approach (HARAP): HARAP is a probabilistic modeling system developed by AVV Transport Research Centre (part of the Dutch Ministry of Transport, Public Works and Water Management) for use within the local port waters of Rotterdam. While HARAP is a fully operational system, it is understood the AVV Transport Research Centre is currently undertaking a project to re-develop HARAP based on concerns in relation to calculated safety levels derived from the system5. HARAP is not available as a commercial product. It was also mentioned by OMC during consultation that they are involved in assisting the AVV Transport Research Centre in this redevelopment.
There are a range of other computer based commercial products that offer a real time UKC calculation capability, however many of these products are essentially UKC calculators as opposed to mission critical real time processing systems, and therefore significantly less sophisticated than that of the above systems. Specific examples of such systems, as well as other companies with a general capability in regard to ship movement and UKC modeling are identified below.
6.5.2
UKC Voyage PlannerTM - Nautical Technology Consultants AS (ATC), Norway
Of all the products identified in this group, the UKC Voyage PlannerTM as provided by Nautical Technology Consultants AS (NTC)6 seems likely to be the most sophisticated. Nautical Technology Consultants AS is a Norwegian-based technology and consulting company offering modeling and simulation services, user-friendly decision-making aids and software applications to shipping and offshore industries worldwide. The primary services offered by NTC are specialist maritime consulting services, and developers of specialist computer models for one off specialist tasks as opposed to commercial product sales. The UKC Voyage Planner is one of their two primary commercial software simulation products. The product appears to be established on the basis of similar modeling criteria to that of the two Australian vendors. However, the real time met-ocean data entry is significantly more simplistic, with manual operator entry of data as applicable instead of electronic integration. The software system has an attractive GUI arrangement, with key clients being ship owners, ship management companies and oil-service companies as opposed to waterways authorities or pilot organizations.
6.5.3
British Marine Technology (BMT) and Dynamic UKC and Passage Planning
British Marine Technology (BMT)7 is one of the worlds leading maritime engineering consultancies, providing a range of different technical services related to ports and terminal approach design. While much of the activity of this company is in relation to ports and terminal approach design, their expertise in ship simulation and related maritime design consideration has ensured they have the expertise to develop customized systems for dynamic UKC and passage planning applications.
Admittance Policy Tidal Bound Ships, Design of a Probabilistic computer model for determination of channel transit risks to seaport, AVV Transport Research Centre, November 2005. 6 Additional information can be found on NTC and associated products at: www.atc.org
7 5
Additional information can be found on BMT and products at: www.bmt.org Page 24
Information available in the public domain in relation to the company indicate that it has experience in the development of one-off dynamic UKC systems for specific applications around the world, however it was not possible to obtain information identifying the existence of any commercialized product for general sales. As with NTC above, the primary service offering of the company is in relation to consulting services and once off specialist tasks as opposed to commercial product sales.
6.5.4
QASTOR, by Quality Positioning Services (QPS) in the Netherlands
QASTOR8 is a software product from Quality Positioning Services (QPS) in the Netherlands, which is part of the HITT (Holland Institute of Traffic Technology) Group. QPS is a well known provider of portable electronic chart and navigation systems for pilots, and QASTOR is one of the groups most well known products. QASTOR is essentially a Windows based ECDIS electronic charting and display system. As with many such systems, QASTOR enables the integration of GPS data and other real time information from ships system (and other sources) so as to create a real time display overlaid onto an S-57 electronic navigational chart. The QASTOR software product is sold to many different systems integrators and providers as a general purpose ECDIS display platform for the implementation of specific use systems. QASTOR is utilised in a number of generic Portable Pilotage Units (PPUs) as distributed by different systems providers. Examples include the SmartDock PILOT system developed and distributed by Harbour & Marine Engineering in Melbourne, and the Harbour Pilot and Passage Pilot PPU products developed and distributed by Navicom Dynamics in New Zealand. As part of the QASTOR software product as sold by QPS/HITT, there are a range of standard add-on modules that can be included to suit individual needs of systems integrators in developing specific use systems. This includes a UKC module (which is available in the SmartDock PILOT and Harbour Pilot/Passage Pilot PPU products). In general, the UKC module available with QASTOR and related integrated systems is a simplistic UKC calculator, which permits semi-automated determination of dynamic clearance based on a combination of operator entered factors and simplistic electronic entry. The QASTOR UKC module was not included in the Navicom Dynamics Passage Pilot PPU as utilised in the VMS KeelClear system, as the KeelClear real time UKC calculation is significantly more sophisticated. As with the QASTOR product, there a number of other ECDIS electronic charting display software systems that provide a real time UKC component, however as with the QASTOR product, they are also relatively simplistic UKC calculators.
6.6
6.6.1
Portable Pilotage Units

General
Utilization of Portable Pilotage Units (PPUs) commenced in the mid to late 1990s, and was originally dedicated to operations onboard oil and gas tankers. The original intent was to provide a pilotage decision support tool for high accuracy navigation to enable replacement of the Laser Docking System9, and other forms of close quarters ship handling tools.
Additional information can be obtained in relation to QPS and QASTOR at: http://www.qps.nl/Eng/Pages/QASTOR.asp 9 The New Generation of Portable Pilotage Aids, Paul Stanley of Navicom Dynamics, New Zealand, in Port Technology International, Summer 2006. Thompson Clarke Shipping Pty Ltd Page 25
The utilization of PPUs was then given a significant boost in 2000 as a result of the European Funded IPPA project, which was specifically focused on how portable technology could improve pilotage operations in general. Although PPUs were identified primarily as a tool for restricted area navigation, its potential wider application as a basic navigation tool in a variety of waterway situations was also acknowledged. As identified in a recent article in Port Technology10, newly available configurations are opening up PPU applications to a much larger group of users. PPU systems are now available in a range of solutions from super accurate systems down to small handy navigation systems. As a result, the demand for PPUs is claimed to be on the increase. The referenced article claims that Australia will have large number of PPUs in use before the end of 2006, which is closely followed by several French, UK and Dutch harbours. Lithuania, Latvia and several places in Russia are providing PPU pilotage services to their customers already. China is another market where demand is strong, with the commissioning of over 20 light systems in the past 18 months. Today, the high-end (high accuracy) systems which are mainly required by the oil and gas markets are well established in countries such as Abu Dhabi, UAE, Angola, Nigeria, Qatar, Oman, Algeria, India and Italy.
6.6.2
Typical Vendors and Types
PPUs are generally marketed by maritime systems equipment integrators, and will comprise a number of components sourced from different manufacturers and vendors (based on the integrators commercial alliances and supply agreements). PPUs are generally marketed as complete systems inclusive of GPS equipment (as applicable to PPU type), portable and field tough laptop computer including an ECS (electronic charting system) software application (which may or may not be a true S57 ECDIS application) plus associated map/chart data, all associated interconnecting cabling or wireless devices, as well as an associated carry case (into which all equipment can generally be packaged and transported). Some of the primary PPU system providers (which can incorporate various differing types of ECS display systems) include: Marimatech in Denmark (E-Sea Fix family), Navicom Dynamics in NZ (i.e. Harbour Pilot and Channel Pilot), AD-Navigation in Norway (ADX PPU) Harbour and Marine Engineering (The Smart Dock PPU) The most common providers of associated ECDIS (or ECS alternate) software applications for PPU systems generally include: Transas Seven Seas Maris Gate House HSA (i.e. Endeavour), and QPS/HITT (i.e. Qastor). Based on marketing material provided by QPS/HITT, only QPS is said to offer a Windows user interface solution, and is therefore a popular choice given the ease of integration within standard general use laptop environments.
10
Focus on Portable Pilotage Units, Erik Brinch Nielsen, Denmark, in Port Technology International, Summer 2006. Thompson Clarke Shipping Pty Ltd Page 26
While there are a great number of PPU variants, most PPUs can be categorized into one of the following three primary types, as follows: Simple PPU: intended for general navigational purposes. In general, these type of PPUs are characterised by the following (including options): No GPS, with a dependency on obtaining AIS information from the Pilot Plug, or an alternate connection to the on-board AIS (either cabled or wireless, with positional accuracy and available information dependent on that provided or derived by the ships systems), or A single GPS antenna only without DGPS capability (i.e. basic positional information only, with positional accuracy to approx 15 metres). Utilizes a PDA or small laptop Inexpensive and very portable
Standard PPU: intended for more demanding restricted waterways and berthing applications. In general, available options and characteristics include: An internal DGPS and/or separate AIS receiver to provide wireless connection to shore (for receipt of shore based correction data and/or other AIS information as available). Code phase measurement methods are most common (and that which is utilised for the AMSA DGPS network of maritime radio beacons), with the potential for less than 10 meter positional accuracy (for 95% of the time). The use of Real Time Kinematic (RTK) signal correction data, enabling increased positional accuracy to within centimetres. This form of data correction uses both code phase and carrier phase correction data measurements. RTK options include RTK L1, or RTK L1+L2 for additional accuracy (i.e. multi-frequency). Two separate DGPS or RTK GPS antennas and associated receivers within a single PPU. This configuration enables the accurate determination of heading independent of course over ground (COG), therefore enabling a true picture of the vessel orientation and positioning within the waterway for highly accurate docking applications (particularly when combined with the RTK correction capability above). This enables a true representation of the vessel orientation on the ECS display facility.
Hybrid/PPU: intended for demanding berthing and other high level accuracy applications, particularly in built up port environments where satellite visibility may be restricted. In general, available options and characteristics include the following: The inclusion of a capability for both the US Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) and the Russian GLObal Navigation Satellite System (GLONASS) in a single system, thereby increasing the number of available satellites for increased accuracy where line of sight problems may exist. The inclusion of a highly accurate Fibre Optic Rate of Turn (FORoT) sensor for extremely accurate and instantaneous rate of turn information, frequently integrated into RTK L1+L2 PPUs, with the inclusion of Kalman filtering to ensure unsurpassed position, heading, rate of turn and velocity results even in the situation of total loss of satellite signals.
6.6.3
Application of a PPU in respect of a Torres Strait Real Time UKC System
In general, the purpose of a PPU is to function as a decision support tool for use by pilots while exercising their navigational duties on-board a vessel. While PPUs serve a valid role as a general purpose navigational tool, their most significant value is derived through application in close quarters ship handling to facilitate maneuvering in restricted waterways and docking. As evidenced in the software applications provided by OMC and VMS, the primary purpose of a real time UKC software system during pilotage is to enable the pilot to obtain relatively accurate real time information as to the anticipated UKC for the remainder of the transit through the associated waterway based on current (and future) navigational status and decisions.
Page 27
As an application in the Torres Strait, the role that the PPU provides (or is intended to provide) in both the OMC and VMS real time UKC system is as follows: As a source of real time vessel information into the real time UKC processing system (eg current lat/long position, speed over ground/SOG, course over ground/COG, and potentially other PPU derived information such as vessel orientation/heading, etc). Based on the architecture of both the OMC and VMS software systems, the processing system is located on shore, thereby requiring a wireless communications service to relay the information to the remote processing system location. As a means of displaying a real time graphical representation of the forecast UKC throughout the remaining channel transit (i.e. a plot of UKC vs location over the remaining channel route on the PPU laptop) based on a shared use of the laptop display screen. Graphical representations from the real time UKC system can also include potential what if UKC scenarios if changes were made to current vessel speed and route throughout the transit. The display enables a pilot to optimise a vessels speed during transit to ensure adequate UKC will be maintained based upon the prevailing environmental conditions on the day. The graphical UKC display is derived from the shore based real time UKC software systems system, which is also receiving real time met-ocean data. As a result, the display information on the PPU laptop requires receipt of data via a wireless communications service from the shore based processing system. In both software systems, it is important to note that the real time UKC software application is a completely separate software application to that of the PPU and its associated ECS display application. As a result, it is therefore theoretically possible for differing types of PPUs to be utilised with either of the two vendors real time UKC software application. The only requirements on PPU selection is therefore: Ensuring the PPU has an ability to output all the input values required by the particular vendors real time UKC processing system. Ensuring the PPU is of a type that provides optimum accuracy in the values derived for use by the real time UKC processing system (thereby minimising tolerance allowances in the final calculated UKC values). Ensuring the PPU includes a means for the output to be relayed via wireless communications to the shore based real time UKC processing system. The ECS display associated with the PPU therefore has no application in the real time UKC system whatsoever, and is of no significance in so far as the operation of the UKC system is concerned. While not able to be determined during the course of this study, it is possible that both real time UKC software applications will have differing input data requirements from the PPU depending on the algorithms and associated input criteria adopted for each of the differing vendor products (i.e. clarification was considered proprietary information by the vendors, and therefore not provided). In theory, irrespective of the PPU type utilised, both software applications would need to incorporate appropriate tolerances in their UKC prediction that accommodates the accuracy limitations of selected PPU type. On the assumption that the real time UKC software will incorporate detailed information on vessel orientation with respect to channel location, COG, and SOG, then the PPU would need to accommodate dual antenna GPS and differential correction as a mandatory minimum requirement. As noted during the demonstration transits conducted during this study, both OMC and VMS utilised standard PPUs with dual GPS antenna arrangements (recognizing that the VMS system was not utilised in a real time capacity during the Torres Strait transits due to an absence of real time metocean data). Based on information available on AMSAs website in respect of the AMSA Maritime DGPS Network, a DGPS MF radio beacon operates at Horn Island providing pseudo-range corrections and rate range corrections from the single reference station.
Page 28
The coverage area from any one AMSA DGPS beacon is quoted as approximately 150 nautical miles to sea. While ultimate vessel position accuracy will be dependent on the location of a vessel in respect of the DGPS site, as well as various other factors, horizontal positional accuracy achievable using this reference site is anticipated to typically be several metres11 at best (i.e. less than 10 meters for 95% of the time, and typically in the range of two to four meters for a typical maritime DGPS receiver). The WGS-84 absolute accuracy of the reference site position for the Horn Island beacon is also quoted by AMSA as several metres, which is significantly less accurate than many of AMSAs other DGPS beacons which are quoted as having a 0.1 metre accuracy. Another key benefit of the application of PPU technology in the Torres Strait is the ability for transit information to be captured in a tamperproof mode for the purpose of incident investigation if ever required.
6.7
6.7.1
Ground Truthing Approach to Integrity and Robustness

General Theory
For the purpose of this report, and based on sound systems engineering principles, the integrity and robustness of any real time UKC system (i.e. the complete system inclusive of software, hardware and all associated interfaces) can be considered in terms of the following three primary factors: Software reliability Software accuracy and precision System availability (i.e. software, hardware, and all interfaces) Each of the above is briefly explained both in theory, and in respect of the two Australian vendors, in the following subsections.
6.7.2
Software Reliability
Software reliability (or robustness) is a measure of software quality and therefore a measure of the existence of potential systemic software errors that may cause an incorrect functioning of the software application itself. Such errors have the potential for software failure resulting in a range of possible failure modes from display of an unintended (and therefore incorrect) result, through to a software crash resulting in a requirement to restart the application (or the computer) to restore operation. In principle, the implementation of quality in software design and development is based on the adoption of appropriate systems engineering management practices, including appropriate software engineering standards for all phases of design, development, and verification/validation activities. Appropriate international standards exist for such engineering management practices, most of which have Australian standard equivalents (e.g. specific examples of applicable Australian/New Zealand engineering standards include AS/NZS 15288 and AS/NZS ISO/IEC 12207). During the course of the consultancy, neither OMC nor VMS identified any specific systems engineering management standards compliance other than generic AS9000 quality systems compliance. In practical terms, software reliability as generally defined above will naturally be improved during the operational life of a software product based on post production and post sales software bug identification and rectification through release of subsequent versions and revisions. Of the two Australian vendors, only the OMC DUKC can be considered a production product, which is based on 13 years of commercial operation and maturity development. The VMS KeelClear product is a preproduction product (no commercial release), and is yet to be field trialled with fully operational real time met-ocean data inputs (therefore yet to be internally validated in a true operational environment).
11
Refer to http://www.amsa.gov.au/Shipping_Safety/Navigation_Safety/Differential_Global_Postitioning_System/DGPS_Fact _Sheet.asp for clarification and further details Thompson Clarke Shipping Pty Ltd Page 29
6.7.3
Software Accuracy and Precision
As discussed in various locations throughout this report, the inherent characteristic of an effective real time UKC software system is that the ultimate accuracy and precision of the output UKC answer will be dependent on the accuracy and precision of the various real time data inputs (incorporated as an allowance or tolerance in the calculated UKC). In the context of this section however, the accuracy and precision refers to the correctness of the output from the software algorithms assuming the real time input data is absolutely correct and precise (i.e. the accuracy and precision influenced by the algorithms alone, and therefore independent of the real time input data values). Software accuracy & precision is a measure of the effectiveness of the software system in providing a correct answer. This is based on the effectiveness of the software algorithm in calculating the result intended, incorporating the extent to which real time information is both necessary and correctly utilised within the algorithms calculation process. The precision component of this factor implies a requirement for predictability in the result, therefore a requirement for the same answer whenever all input variables are a defined set of values (i.e. repeatability). It is evident from the consultation undertaken, and the resulting limited information provided by the two Australian vendors (based on commercial concerns regarding protection of IP), that quantitative determination of the correctness of the UKC output resulting from the application of the OMC and VMS software products based on an assessment of methodologies, algorithms, input data dependencies, and the associated criticalities of each input in respect of UKC output, is not possible in the scope of this study. While additional information may be provided by the vendors through the application of a more comprehensive commercial in confidence regime, TCS anticipates that even then forthcoming information (and the ability to confidently utilise such information in any formal report) would still prevent the undertaking of a definitive quantitative correctness assessment and performance comparison. Given the limitations identified above, and in a practical sense, software accuracy and precision for any real time UKC software system will be best assessed through the implementation of a controlled and accurately measured field trial in the waterway concerned. The intent of the field trial is to measure actual UKC (using the most correct measurement systems possible within budget constraints) against the UKC as predicted by the operational real time UKC system based on a sufficiently large sample of multiple transits.
6.7.4
System Availability
System availability is a measure of the probability that the system (including all required elements of hardware and software) will be fully operational at any given point in time (i.e. whenever it is requested for use). Availability is therefore a performance criterion for repairable systems that accounts for both the reliability and maintainability properties of a system (which theoretically includes the software reliability criteria above). In general however, system availability is measured in terms of hardware availability (based on statistical measures of mean time between failures, etc), and is optimized through the utilization of highly reliable products and the use of redundant components where necessary to ensure continued operation in the event of failure in any one single component of the system. System availability can be qualitatively or quantitatively determined from an assessment of both the system architecture and associated operational arrangements, as well as a statistical assessment of the individual system components and their associated reliability measures (i.e. Mean Time Between Failures [MTBF] as quoted by manufacturers, etc). In addition to the inherent system availability aspects unique to a particular vendors product, system availability will also be influenced during the design of a specific installation through cost/benefit procurement decisions following the selection of a particular vendor (i.e. any vendors system can be made more available through the selection of appropriate components and configuration of those components). From a practical perspective, some of the specific issues that will influence system availability for a Torres Strait real time UKC system will include:
The specific communications services used (and any redundancy) in relaying information between the PPU and an on-shore real time processing system, as well as the communications services used in retrieving information from the real time met-ocean data collection devices. The ability of the real time UKC system (or service) to continue functioning on the occurrence of a communications failure. The robustness and overall availability of the met-ocean data collection device network, including the extent to which failures in the met-ocean devices occur, and the time it takes to respond, repair and restore failed or malfunctioning devices. The ability of the real time UKC system to continue functioning on the occurrence of failure in one or more met-ocean data collection devices. The robustness and overall availability of the selected PPU (in relation to its role in the real time UKC system), the field tough laptop, and any other associated on-board system components. The extent to which the on-shore real time UKC processing system (i.e. the back office) is designed and implemented in respect of uninterruptible power supplies, dual computer systems with parallel processing capability and failover, operations management and maintenance practices including vendor support when necessary, etc. Given that a real time UKC system is a safety critical system, the issues of system availability becomes a significant design criteria, with a requirement for an appropriate level of redundancy, high reliability components, etc so as to ensure an appropriate high level of system availability is achieved to reflect the safety critical requirement. Many of the above availability issues can be considered and addressed irrespective of which vendors real time UKC software system is adopted. In relation to vendor specific aspects influencing systems availability, the following comments are made in respect of the OMC and VMS products and the vendors recommended operational configuration: Both the OMC and VMS recommend a system configuration (or architecture) that is dependent on a shore based real time UKC processing system, with wireless communications required to provided UKC information to the pilots PPU during transit. Each of the vendors recommends a different method of ensuring continued operation in the even of a communications failure between the shore based processing system and the on-board pilots PPU, as follows: The OMC DUKC PPU software product includes a stand alone mode of operation to ensure that the UKC prediction function remains operational, with continued real time data from the PPU (i.e. position, speed, etc) and met-ocean devices. The stand alone operation automatically re-synchronizes with the shore based processing system once communications is restored. A similar capability with the KeelClear product was not identified in the data sheets provided by VMS. The VMS system configuration is based on the use of onshore pilot to provide a monitoring and fallback service (i.e. pilotage assistance) in the event of a communications failure. The use of a pilot ashore enables provision of navigation advice (via a secondary voice radio communications) in relation to UKC forecasts for the remaining transit, based on manually entered position and speed updates (as the real time PPU data will no longer be available to the processing system).
6.7.5
Practical Performance Trial
While software reliability (or robustness) and system availability are performance characteristics that can be qualitatively analyzed (as a minimum) and/or inferred as discussed in the sections above, the issue of accuracy and precision of the real time UKC system overall (i.e. correctness of the calculated UKC incorporating both the inherent accuracy and precision of the algorithms PLUS that of the real time data inputs and map soundings) can only ever be truly assessed through the application of a full scale practical performance trial. During the consultation, both OMC and VMS agreed that a
Page 31
performance trial is the only true approach to validating a real time UKC system. A post installation performance trial has been part of all DUKC installations undertaken by OMC to date. In general, this implies implementation of all required real time met-ocean data devices, and utilization of the required on-board PPU to enable the processing system to derive the calculated UKC forecast for a transit. The calculated UKC forecast is then compared with a real time measurement of actual UKC as achieved using a high accuracy measurement system. With the use of a dual frequency high quality echo sounder, and accurate positioning of sensor/receptor on a vessel (including any necessary correction factors), depth accuracies in the order of 0.1 to 0.15 metres are possible (derived from repeatability of measurements). As with any practical performance trial, multiple transits will be required (potentially involving differing vessel types) to ensure a sufficiently large statistical sample size to provide confidence in the repeatability of measurements in general, as well as the ability to correctly account for differing vessel types. As noted by OMC during consultation, the exact nature of a practical performance trial would need to be assessed as part of the preliminary investigations undertaken by the real time UKC software provider in assessing in detail the primary influencing factors on UKC throughout all sections of the waterway, the tradeoffs associated with type and number of real time met-ocean data collection devices, and implications for their UKC software. As a result, it may also be appropriate to utilise an accurate RTK GPS measurement system (in reference to X, Y and Z of a fixed shore reference) in all performance trial transits so as to confirm specific vessel movement and related behaviour associated with the assumed primary determinates of UKC for each section of the waterway.12
12
Refer to http://metoceanengineers.com/products_services/pdfs/oceanographic/retwac_brochure.pdf for details
Page 32
7
7.1
ENDEAVOUR RIVER VOYAGE WEIPA TO CAIRNS General
In addition to the voyages referenced in the previous section to demonstrate the vendors PPUs, one of the Thompson Clarke Shipping consultants traveled aboard the Panamax bulk carrier MV Endeavour River carrying a full cargo of bauxite from Weipa to Gladstone. The following account relates to the findings of this trip in relation to Under Keel Clearance of a deep draught vessel transiting the Torres Strait.
7.2
Weipa
The vessel was boarded at the Lorim Point Wharf in Weipa on Saturday 28th October 2006 for a departure scheduled for 1715 on the same day. The Torres Strait pilot also boarded in Weipa. The draught was observed as being the maximum 12.2m with the vessel being on an even keel with no trim or list. The departure draught was recorded as: F Aft Midships 12.18 m 12.22 m 12.24 m
Calculated to arrive at the Varzin Channel at an even keel draught of 12.2m. The maximum permissible draught for departure Weipa was 12.53m at 1715 with a tide height of 2.63m and an alongside maintained depth of 12.3m. The echo sounder showed a depth under keel of 4.3m which would appear to have been in excess of what would have been expected i.e. 1.7m. This may have been an error caused by the small under keel clearance or possibly some water disturbance created by the propeller. It was noted that there was a difference in the trace Echo Sounder digital depth display in the chartroom and the remote sounding display at the bridge front of about + 0.5m on the remote display. All soundings recorded in the transit have been brought back to the lower reading. The vessel left the berth at 1712 and proceeded out of Weipa Harbour via the dredged harbour channel (maintained depth 10.8m) and through the South channel (maintained depth 11.1m) to the open sea and set course for the Varzin Passage requiring an average speed of 10.5 knots to achieve the desired arrival time of 0850/29th October. The minimum UKC as shown by the echo sounder was 1.6m in water depths of about 11m plus tide which would seem to be about right although this not making any allowance for squat; the vessel was doing 7.6 knots over the ground.
7.3
The Torres Strait Transit
The vessel arrived at the entrance to the Varzin passage (C1 Buoy) at 0845 on 29th October. The matrix in Fig 7 shows the progress of the passage along with water depths and echo sounder readings along with relevant observations.
Page 33
Time 0700 0730 0800 0830 0845 0900 0908 0930 1000 1030 1054 1128 1147 1315 1321
Latitude 10 45.2'S o 10 41.2'S o 10 37.6'S o 10 33.8'S o 10 32.3'S o 10 31.7'S o 10 31.8'S o 10 33.0'S o 10 34.0'S o 10 33.0'S o 10 30.7'S o 10 29.9'S o 10 30.1'S o 10 43.7'S
o
Longitude 141 35.8'E o 141 40.9'E o 141 45.6'E o 141 50.1'E o 141 52.3'E o 141 54.7'E o 141 56.2'E o 141 59.5'E o 142 04.2'E o 142 09.0'E o 142 12.8'E o 142 18.9'E o 142 22.5'E o 142 39.4'E
o
10o 44.9'S 142 40.7'E
SOG Knots 12.3 12.4 11.6 10.8 10.2 10 9.6 10 10 10.2 10.8 11.8 13.3 14.0 14.5
Datum (m) 15.4 13.6 13.5 12.2 11.7 11.1 10.6 11.7 12.0 11.8 14.0 13.5 14.0 >20.0 >15.0
Torres Strait Transit - tv Endeavour River - 29th October 2006 Tide Tide Draft Static Echo Remarks Obs (m) Pred (m) (m) UKC (m) Sounder (m) BI 1.7 BI 1.75 12.2 4.9 4.6 Wind SE 10kts, seas <0.5m, fine & clear BI 2.1 BI 2.04 12.2 3.5 3.4 BI 2.4 BI 2.33 12.2 3.7 3.5 BI 2.6 BI 2.58 12.2 2.2 2.1 BI 2.8 BI 2.72 12.2 2.3 2.0 BI 2.8 BI 2.83 12.2 1.7 1.6 In Varzin Passage BI 2.9 BI 2.88 12.2 1.3 1.2 Passed C3 Buoy, strong N'ly set BI 3.0 BI 2.99 12.2 2.5 2.5 Wind E x S 5kts, seas <0.5m, fine & clear GI 2.8 GI 2.76 12.2 2.6 3.6 GI 2.9 GI 2.83 12.2 2.5 2.2 1020 Goods Is A/C 088 to 055, sand disturbance- see Photo TH 2.3 TH 2.18 12.2 4.1 4.2 Abeam Hammond Rock IP 2.0 IP 2.02 12.2 2.3 3.5 Abeam Ince Point Wind ESE 10kts, seas <0.5m, Fine & clear IP 2.0 IP 2.02 12.2 3.8 3.0 Vessel clear of Herald Patches A/C, sand disturbance 12.2 Abeam Middle Brother Abt 2.0 12.2 8.5 Brothers Patches A/C in sandwave area, sand disturbance
Note: No allowance is made for vessel squat in the above matrix.

Figure 7: Passage Progress and Sounder Readings
Page 34
It can be seen from the above table that the variation between the observed under keel readings and the Static Under Keel Clearance calculation have differences of up to + 1.2m but it should be noted that no allowance for squat has been made. For example at Hammond Rock the theoretical squat calculation for a Panamax vessel at a speed through the water of 8.85 knots (SOG 10.8 kts 1.95 kts Easterly tidal stream)., squat of 1.32m for closed waters and 0..66m for open water would appear to suggest that there may be more water than chart datum plus tide would indicate assuming the actual amount of vessel squat was between the two figures. As with most transits of the Torres Strait a trail of disturbed sand was evident throughout caused by turbulence created by the propeller and rudder in the shallow water. However, during larger alterations of course there was a noticeable vibration throughout the vessel and the propeller kicked up a substantial amount of sand indicating the closeness of the vessel to the bottom see photographs below.
Altering Course off Goods Island at 1018/29th
Altering Course of Hammond Rock at 1052//29th
Figure 8: Voyage Photos Although this phenomena does not necessarily indicate a significant risk given the lack of longitudinal and transverse movement of the vessel in the normally benign weather, and smooth waters, in view of the uncertainty of depth due to the survey tolerances, the introduction of a UKC system would provide greater reassurance of the available UKC. The vessel cleared the Brothers Patches at 1330/29th by which time the vessel was up to full speed of 15 knots for the voyage south to Gladstone. The Torres Strait pilot and TCS consultant left the vessel by helicopter off Cairns on the evening of 30th October. Queensland Aluminium Ltd and ASP are to be thanked for their co-operation in allowing the trip to be undertaken.
Page 35
8
8.1
INPUT DATA QUALITY General
The integrity of the calculation used to determine real-time UKC is dependant on the quality of the data used in each of the components that make up the calculation. An examination of each of these different components shows that there is some possibility of error that, in a worst case, could compound and introduce a significant accumulative error to the detriment of the UKC calculation.
8.2
8.2.1
Hydrographic Data
Surveys
The Australian Hydrographic Office (AHO) provided advice that the last major survey done of the Prince of Wales Channel was carried out in 2001 using multi beam equipment. Using data collected during this survey the AHO is currently preparing an Electronic Navigation Chart of the region, the publication of which is imminent. According to the Hydrographer the error in survey data collected during most general surveys can be up to +1.2m. These figures are a function of water depth; generally the deeper the water, the greater the errors. A ZOC area is designated according to the error estimates for all the soundings within it. On the current large scale charts of the region Aus 293 Prince of Wales Channel and Aus 296 Goods Island to Proudfoot Shoal, the reliability diagrams show accuracy of soundings of 0.3 to 0.5 of a metre with one area between Nardana Patches and Pullar Patches in the Prince of Wales channel showing an estimated accuracy of 0.8 of a metre. The sounding lines vary from three metres to 75 metres apart for the main shipping channel but the whole area has been sonar swept and shoals have been examined. In order to achieve optimum accuracy in depth surveys one of the emerging trends is the use of Real Time Kinematic (RTK) GPS surveying techniques. This uses the vertical component of RTK GPS to determine real-time water level corrections and can generally give an antenna or even depth sounder transponder position accuracy to 0.02m 0.05m. Despite this level of accuracy depth measurement errors still have to be considered so realistic depth accuracies using RTK technology should still be considered to be about 0.2 to 0.3m. The advantage of using RTK GPS is the accuracy that can be achieved in the spatial positioning of the soundings as well as the increased depth accuracy over conventional survey techniques. See http://www.hypack.com/support_articles/TrainingNotes2006.htm - then RTK Tides
8.2.2
Reliability Diagrams and Zone of Confidence (ZOC) Diagrams
A Reliability Diagram is a scaled replica of a charted area shown on a chart that shows the extent of surveys conducted and the information relating to each survey area in the form of a code indicating the quality of the survey. An example of such a code follows:
CE (3) 125 S X 1988

Key to Symbols
C E (3) 1988 Controlled Survey Sounded by Echo Sounder Accuracy of soundings in decimeters Year of survey 125 S X Distance apart of main line of soundings in metres Sonar Swept Shoals have been examined
Page 36
Reliability diagrams are being replaced by Zone of Confidence diagrams on new charts. ZOCs provide six categories of definition based on survey accuracy. Three parameters, Position Accuracy, Depth Accuracy and Seafloor Coverage, are required to be met before a ZOC category can be determined. The ZOC categories are tabulated as follows: Depth Seafloor Accuracy Coverage Full seafloor coverage. All significant features = 0.5m + detected and depths measured 1% depth Depth Accuracy (m) (m) 10 + 0.6 + 0.8 30 + 1.5 100 + 10.5 1000 Full seafloor coverage. All significant features + = 1.0m + detected and depths measured 20m 2% depth Depth Accuracy (m) (m) 10 + 1.2 + 1.6 30 + 3.0 100 + 21.0 1000 Full seafloor coverage not achieved; uncharted + = 1.0m + features, hazardous to surface navigation are 50m 2% depth Depth Accuracy (m) not expected but may exist (m) 10 + 1.2 + 1.6 30 + 3.0 100 + 21.0 1000 Full seafloor coverage not achieved; depth + = 2.0m + anomalies may be expected. 500m 5% depth Depth Accuracy (m) (m) 10 + 2.5 + 3.5 30 + 7.0 100 + 52.0 1000 Worse than ZOC C. Full seafloor coverage not achieved; large depth anomalies may be expected. Unassessed Figure 10: Category of Zones of Confidence (ZOC Table) It can be seen from the ZOC table that even the most accurate ZOC category tabulated, A1, only gives a depth accuracy to + 0.5m + 1% of depth so in the Torres Strait region where the charted depths are between 10 to 15 metres an error of about 0.6 of a metre is applicable if surveyed to that standard. ZOC categories are assigned at the time of survey but their integrity diminishes with time, particularly in areas where the seabed is liable to shift. Information supplied by the Hydrographic Office shows the Zone of Confidence diagrams for the five areas in the Torres Strait considered to be depth limited. The five areas are:
ZOC A1
Position Accuracy + 5m
A2
D U
Information taken from the Mariners Handbook (NP 100)
Gannet Patches Prince of Wales Channel (Western Entrance) Nardana Patches Herald and Alert Patches Brothers Patches All the surveys for these areas were conducted in 2001 with the exception of Brothers Patches that was surveyed in 1998. The depth accuracies for Gannet Passage and Brothers Patches is within the order of 0.3 to 04m associated with the least surveyed depth on the recommended track in each case. The accuracy of the surveys conducted in the other locations were compromised by tide gauge failure see Appendix A, resulting in depth accuracies in the order of 0.7m. The AHO believes that if these surveys were conducted again with properly functioning tide gauges the depth accuracies for these areas would be of the order of 0.4 m, consistent with Gannet Passage and Brothers Patches. If new surveys were conducted using RTK position fixing it may also be possible to reduce the accuracy values quoted here by about half again i.e. 0.2m. The following chartlets show the areas surveyed:
Page 38
Gannet and Varzin Passages (Source AHO)
Page 39
Prince of Wales Channel (Source AHO)
Page 40
Nardana Patches (source AHO)
Page 41
Herald and Alert Patches (source AHO)
Page 42
Brothers Patches (source AHO)
Page 43
It can be seen from the foregoing chartlets that in all but the Gannet and Varzin Passages that have the ZOC Category A1 depth accuracy (accuracy to + 0.6m), the remaining depth limited areas have the ZOC Category A2 ( depth accuracy to + 1.2m). (It should be noted that, although the depth accuracy indications for Brothers Patches (+ 0.3m) would indicate a Category of ZOC A1, the survey of 1998 was only of a limited area so the ZOC Category was left A2 as determined in the earlier 1987 survey) It has to be stressed that these ZOCs are only accurate for the time when the surveys were done. In order to provide the best information to support a real-time UKC system the Hydrographic Office believes surveys should probably be conducted to A1 standard to allow for any changes in the seabed (worst case + 0.6m in 10m) between surveys.
8.2.3
Survey Position Fixing
The Mariners Handbook states that the current accuracy standard for positioning in surveys is 13m for the most general surveys with an improvement to + 5 metres for some special purpose surveys and in both cases for 95% of the time. Modern survey methods should provide an improvement on the general survey figure so that information obtained should be accurate to better than 10 metres. The introduction of RTK GPS surveying techniques will greatly improve the spatial accuracy of hydrographic surveying see Section 8.2.1
8.2.4
Bottom Profile
It is reported that the bottom profile at each end of the Prince of Wales channel is of fine sand and this is supported by sparse indications on the large scale charts that show fine sand and shell. Bottom quality as indicated on charts should be treated with caution as some sampling has been carried out using techniques that can only sample the surface layer. The Prince of Wales channel has a rocky bottom which is constantly scoured by the very strong currents that flow through the channel. In 1972 a vessel, the Oceanic Grandeur, touched bottom on a rock outcrop between the Alert Patches and the Herald Patches at the Eastern end of the Prince of Wales channel. Following this incident the feature now known as OG Rock was removed by detonation and is now charted at a depth of 12.2m. Several locations in the Torres Strait are notated as sand wave areas so any charts depths indicated should be treated with caution as, according to the Hydrographer, sand waves can move from one location to another very quickly and alter the available depth of water by +/- 0.3m thus introducing another potential compromise to the accuracy of the charted depths. Australia Pilot III (13.73) notes that annual depth variations of up to one metre have been recorded.
8.3
8.3.1
Metocean Data
Tide Heights
Tides within the Torres Strait are complex as a result of the meeting of two oceans, the Pacific and the Indian. The tides are characterized by the Western end of the strait experiencing diurnal tides whilst the Eastern end of the strait experiences semi-diurnal tides. This anomaly sometimes results in experiencing spring tides on one side of the strait and neaps on the other at certain times whilst it is also possible for HW on one side to coincide with LW on the other. This imbalance can lead to very strong currents flowing from the high to the low level through the strait. There are five transmitting tide gauges established between Booby Island and Ince Point, the Western and Eastern ends of the Prince of Wales channel respectively. They are: Booby Island Goods Island
Page 44
Turtle Head Nardana Patches Ince Point Each station transmits a 6 minute update of the tide height. The National Tide Centre advises that the accuracy of the existing tide gauges is + 1cm.
8.3.2
Tide Residuals
Due to the effects of weather and climate there can be a significant difference in the predicted tide and the observed tide; these differences are known as the tide residuals. In addition the effects of long distance weather systems and storm activity can affect the timing of the predicted tide sometimes up to an hour. This is due to water volumes being either pushed or withheld by weather systems and bringing forward or delaying the time of high water. In the Torres Strait the tide residuals seem to average about + 0.2m over a year but they can occasionally be as high as + 0.6m at some locations. The National Tidal Centre in Adelaide records these residuals and provides annual graphs for the tide gauge positions in the Torres Strait (Refer to Appendix B). The following information specific to the Prince of Wales Channel was provided by the National Tidal Centre: Table 1 Location Ince Point Turtle Head Goods Island Booby Island 2002 0.085 0.097 0.119 0.119 2003 0.091 0.105 0.124 0.143 2004 0.089 0.106 0.125 0.136 2005 0.082 0.095 0.113 0.127
Table 1: The standard deviation of the residuals in metres after tidal analysis of the observations of sea levels at tidal gauge locations in Torres Strait. A typical analysis of sea levels for tides involves a harmonic fit of 112 different frequencies that are known to occur as a result of the rotation of the Earth around the Sun and the Moon around the Earth. That part of the sea level signal that cannot be explained by this analysis is referred to as the residual. This occurs as a result of unpredictable weather, interannual changes due to large scale oceanic influences such as el Nio, etc. In Table 1, the average size of this unpredictable component of the sea level is quantified with the use of a statistical measure called the standard deviation. Using the theory of statistics and assuming that the distribution of the residuals follows a normal pattern, we can say that 95% of the residuals are less than 2 times the standard deviation, that is for Ince Point, in 2002, 95% of the residuals are less than 2 times 0.085, or 0.17 metres. To put this another way, we find that on average, during 2002, 5% of the unpredictable part of the sea levels were larger than 0.17 metres. In order of size of the unpredictable part of sea level we see that Ince Point is on average smallest with Booby Island largest. This is of course information based on post analyses of 4 years of data at each location, in which each analysis is of one year of observations. This allows therefore the average sea level to change from one years analysis to the next in response to the large scale slower changes in mean sea level. In a real time system, these changes can be made much more frequently and therefore deal with some of the longer term unpredictability much better.
8.3.3
Tidal Streams and Currents
Tidal streams through the Prince of Wales Channel from Twin Island to West of Goods Island generally run at the times predicted at Hammond Rock Lighthouse but the rate of tide will be less at the Eastern and Western ends of the channel where it widens; normally tides at the entrance are only about 30% of those at Hammond Rock. The direction of the tidal stream is generally E/W in the Prince of Wales Channel and the rate can be significant, reaching up to 8 knots. Wind generated currents generally set Westerly except in the monsoon months of December to February when they set Easterly. Strong steady winds from a particular direction can cause currents to be significant.
8.3.4
Storm Surges
The Torres Strait is susceptible to storm surges created by cyclone activity, sometimes distant from the strait itself. These surges can increase or lower the level of the water considerably and as they are largely unpredictable, defining the affect of them on navigation is very difficult.
8.3.5
Weather
Allowances have to be made for changes in barometric pressure and other aspects of local weather that can affect the sea level in the Torres Strait; a change of one Hectopascal in barometric pressure can change the sea level by one cm. The diurnal barometric pressure varies at Horn Island by about three to five Hectopascals although there is little variation over the year. In a real-time UKC calculation an input is allowed for that takes into account the effects of weather, based on historical information that, by its nature, has to be conservative to take into account anything unpredictable. In a real-time UKC situation weather can be reasonably accurately predicted. Generally speaking the weather in the Torres Strait is relatively benign. Observations recorded at Horn Island show that for 91% of the year wind speed is less that 30km/hr (16.1kts Beaufort Force 4) blowing predominantly from the SE except for the monsoon season, December to March, when they blow predominantly from the NW. Local gales are rare. At Horn Island the annual precipitation ranges from a low of 1244mm/yr to a high of 2683mm/yr measured over 12 years from 1995 to date. The months with the greatest rainfall are December through to April with an average of 330mm. The incidence of fog is uncommon.
8.4
8.4.1
Vessel Considerations
Draught
Draught can only be read accurately in still water either by observation or by using a remote reading draught gauge. Even in slightly choppy water reading draught accurately is subject to errors, as an average value needs to be taken from the highest and lowest readings. If using a draught gauge regular calibration of the gauge is necessary against observed draught in still water to minimize reading errors. Vessels arriving for transit of the Torres Strait declare their draught to the pilot but no visual check is made to verify that the draught is accurate. Deep draught vessels arriving after a voyage of days or weeks calculate their draught based on the observed departure draught corrected for the use of consumables within the vessel i.e., fuel, water, stores etc. This has the potential for the Master of such a vessel to declare a draught that could be inaccurate to several centimeters that, when considering the small under keel clearance, could reduce the minimum UKC required.
8.4.2
Squat
As a vessel makes way through the water it displaces a volume of water thus creating a hole as the displaced water passes down the sides of the vessel. This results in the vessel sinking bodily in the water, sometimes with an increase in bow or stern trim. This phenomenon is known as squat. Squat is a function of: The speed of the vessel The shape of the hull The block coefficient (Cb) of the hull (Cb is defined as the amount of volume the underwater section of the hull would occupy in a block that had the same maximum dimensions (L x W x D) as the underwater section. It is expressed as a proportion of 1 i.e. a bulk carrier would have a Cb of about 0.85 and a container ship a Cb of about 0.65. The depth of water The area the vessel is navigating in i.e. open water or a restricted waterway Although many studies have been carried out into the effects of squat one of the formulae in common use to determine the effects of squat is known as Dr Barrasss Formula denoted as: Squat in metres = Where: V2 k x Cb 100
V = Vessel speed k = Constant 1 for open water, 2 for shallow or restricted waters Cb = Block coefficient
So it can be seen for a Panamax size vessel with a block coefficient of 0.85 traveling at 10 knots, that the squat in open water would be: Squat in metres = 102 x 1 x 0.85 = 0.85m 100
Using the Constant K = 2, squat for a vessel in shallow or restricted water would be double that experienced in open water i.e. 1.7m. By its nature this calculation cannot be definitive as hull forms differ slightly but it does provide a good indication of the significant effect that squat can have on a vessel. It is evident also, that squat can be reduced by a reduction in speed or entering deeper water. Generally bulk carriers squat by the bow whereas container ships squat by the stern, a function of their respective block coefficients. Squat can also increase as a result of interaction caused by two vessels passing close to each other, particularly in a restricted waterway. An observation made during the research for this report when traveling on a Panamax bulk carrier from Weipa to Cairns via the Torres Strait, indicated that when traveling at 15knots the lowest point of the transom was submerged by approximately 20cm + 10cm. The measured draught of this lowest point was 13.25m which would give an indication that the transom was submerged to about 13.45m that, minus the draught of 12.2m would suggest a squat value in excess of 1m in a water depth showing 9m under the keel on the echo sounder. For the purposes of the two real-time UKC systems that have been analyzed in this report it is under stood that the formula used for the squat component of the UKC calculation was that developed by Eryuzlu which has been developed specifically for bulk carriers with a block coefficient above 0.80 operating in shallow or restricted waterways.
8.4.3
Vessel Motion
When operating in a seaway all vessels are subject to dynamic forces that are described as the Six Degrees of Freedom. Each of these vessel motions are indicated in the following diagram:
Figure 11: Degrees of Freedom
When considering the very small UKCs associated with large deep draught ships transiting the Torres Strait it can be seen that a very small amount of vessel movement is required to lose that under keel clearance. In the case of a Panamax bulk carrier with a length of 255 m and a beam of 32m the vessel only has to roll/heel 4o to increase draught by approximately 1m and very little pitch or heave is required to lose the minimum under keel clearance forward or aft required for a deep draught vessel to transit the Torres Strait. Fortunately the weather, as described previously, is relatively benign so large deep draught vessels do not experience too much of the motions indicated above. Alterations of course also have the ability to make the vessel heel so small rudder movements and slow alterations of course are required to ensure that the vessel does not heel excessively. List and trim of the vessel can also compromise under keel clearance as can vessel hog and sag so achieving a satisfactory loaded condition taking these factors into account is important.
Page 48
9
9.1
TYPICAL MET-OCEAN DATA COLLECTION EQUIPMENT General
The purpose of this section is to identify and briefly discuss key infrastructure associated with the implementation of a real-time UKC system other than the UKC software, associated processing system, and PPU (which were discussed in detail in earlier sections of this report). As with most technology, oceanographic and meteorological instrumentation is forever developing, with new technologies continually being released to supersede those of yesterday. As a result, the purpose of this section is not to provide a detailed assessment of such technologies, but to provide a brief description as to potential and likely technologies for use in a Torres Strait real-time UKC system implementation.
9.2
Wave Rider Buoys
The traditional oceanographic instrument for wave measurement (height and direction), which is generally suitable for all open ocean locations, is the wave rider. The wave rider is a small surface buoy on a mooring which follows the wave motion. A vertical accelerometer built into the wave rider measures the buoy's acceleration generated by the waves. The data can either be stored internally for later retrieval or transmitted in real-time to shore. Wave riders provide information on wave height and wave period, and if fitted with a set of three orthogonal accelerometers they also record wave direction. While there is an argument to suggest that wave rider technology is gradually being superseded by advanced acoustic current profilers with incorporated surface tracking technology, there are still numerous wave rider devices installed in the waters around the Australian coastline. These devices are owned and operated by the Australian EPA and other state based maritime and environmental organizations. An example of current wave rider technology is the Directional Waverider MK III from Datawell (Netherlands), which has the following key specification characteristics: Wave motion sensor based on a stabilised platform, accelerometers, and magnetic compass measures wave height for wave periods of 1.6 to 30 seconds, accuracy 0.5 % of measured value measures wave direction measures water temperature GPS for buoy monitoring and tracking through HF (or alternate communications) link internal logger LED flash antenna 0.9m (0.7m) diameter spherical hull of AISI 316 optional Cunifer hull, warranted not to corrode 3 years (or 1 year) battery life HF transmitter range 50 km over sea optional Argos module for ocean wide coverage and unlimited range optional Orbcomm module (incl. GPS module) for two-way communication with buoy, independent of global position optional GSM module for data transmission via the GSM network
Page 49
Figure 12: Typical Wave Rider Device
Acoustic Doppler Current Profilers (ACDPs) and RETWAC

9.3
The traditional ADCP is an instrument used to measure water current, or more correctly, a current profile from seabed to the sea surface. Acoustic Doppler Current Profilers (or ADCPs) operate on the same principle as traditional acoustic current meters but have a transmitter and receiver in one unit and use reflections of the sound wave from drifting particles for the measurement. Seawater always contains a multitude of small suspended particles and other solid matter that may not all be visible to the naked eye but reflects sound. If sound is transmitted in four inclined beams at right angle to each other, the Doppler frequency shift of the reflected sound gives the reflecting particle velocity along the beam. With at least three beams inclined to the vertical the three components of flow velocity can be determined. Different arrival times indicate sound reflected at different distances from the transducers, so an ADCP provides information on current speed and direction not just at one point in the ocean but for a certain depth range; in other words, an ADCP produces a current profile over depth. A current state of the art ACDP is the RETWAC (Real-Time Waves and Current), which is distributed by MetOcean Engineers Pty Ltd (Perth)13. The RETWAC is based on the Nortek (Norway) AWAC (Acoustic Waves and Currents) oceanographic instrumentation system, which includes both an ACDP for current profiling (i.e. measurement of current speed and direction at multiple depths), and Acoustic Surface Technology (AST) for measurement and reporting on surface wave height, period and direction. In addition, the RETWAC has the capability to integrate a range of meteorological measurement sensors to permit the establishment of a complete met-ocean data collection station. The primary component of the RETWAC is the seabed mounted acoustic wave and current profiler.
13
Refer to http://metoceanengineers.com/products_services/pdfs/oceanographic/retwac_brochure.pdf for details Page 50
Figure 12: AWAC Instrument in Seabed Frame
Figure 13: Seabed mounted acoustic wave and current profiler
Mounted adjacent to the shipping channel close to a navigation pile, RETWAC data can be returned to a central point via cable or radio modem, for display on one of several general purpose software packages, or as input into custom developed software applications depending on requirements. Using solar power to operate both the AWAC and data link service intervals are minimized, as there is no need to schedule battery replacement. Marine growth is minimized by covering the AWAC with an antifouled acoustically transparent shield. Manufactured from plastics and titanium corrosion of the AWAC in seawater is avoided. The use of armoured cables increases system life and reliability. A MetOcean RETWAC site can also incorporate a MetOcean tidal measurement system (i.e. a tide gauge) and an array of meteorological sensors to provide a full met/ocean data suite for operation with a real-time UKC system. Typical met data sensors can include:
Wind sensor. Barometric pressure sensor Air temperature sensor Relative humidity sensor Solar radiation sensor Rainfall gauge RETWACs are acknowledge by both VMS and OMC (as providers of real-time UKC systems) to be the industry standard for real-time met-ocean data collection, and currently utilised in a number of OMCs existing UKC installations. A typical arrangement for a RETWAC site is as shown in the layout diagram below.
Figure 14: Typical RETWAC Site Configuration
A primary advantage of the seabed mounting of the main instrumentation is that it protects the AWAC from harsh weather, passing vessel traffic and vandalism. A number of communications modes to shore (or to a vessel PPU) are possible, including VHF/HF, Inmarsat, AIS, etc.
Page 52
9.4
Other Devices
While dependent on detailed investigation by the real-time UKC systems provider, and review of the potential tradeoffs in device types, number, and installation locations (cf costs, UKC accuracy, etc), other devices may also be utilised given the differing cost of infrastructure, method of data determination, and inherent accuracies. For example, a current meter buoy system is significantly less cost than a full RETWAC, but has the potential to provide a higher level of accuracy in current measurement. A typical current meter is the Nortek Aquadopp Buoy (also available through MetOcean Engineers in Perth) which has the ability to measure the following: Water current speed at a single depth beneath the instrument (user defined) Water temperature at the instrument The Aquadopp instrument is mounted directly beneath the buoy in a protective frame, and connected to the communications equipment located within the buoy via underwater rated connectors and cable.
Figure 15: Deployed Aquadopp Buoy
Similar to the RETWAC, the Aquadoop has the capability to relay data in real-time to a shore based (or PPU) processing system by a variety of radio/satellite communications means.
Page 53
10
10.1
ECONOMIC ANALYSIS POTENTIAL ECONOMIC BENEFITS DERIVED FROM INCREASING DRAUGHT General
For decades, the draught in Torres Strait has been fixed at 12.2 metres and therefore vessels have been observing the draught limits. This section is based on the potential to increase cargo liftings by loading to two deeper draughts of 12.5 metres and 12.8 metres.
10.2
Approach
The approach taken in the economic evaluation is to try and estimate the annual economic benefits that can be gained through an improvement in productivity and to identify the principal trades in which productivity can be obtained from using any increased depth of water in the Torres Strait. The evaluation has been undertaken at a very high level based on limited information and data and therefore may be subject to error and inaccuracy. Many assumptions have been made which may or may not reflect actuality. Furthermore in recent years the dry and liquid bulk trades have seen extraordinary fluctuations in daily hire rates making it extremely difficult to predict any reliable costings or to forecast what may happen in the future. Statistics used have been sourced from two sources within AMSA, being those collected by the ReefRep reporting system and those collected by AMSA Canberra through the Pilotage Application System (PAS) both being for the year 2005-2006. Data has been sorted and collated with vessels being grouped into standard vessel categories using two trade routes, the GNE Channels and the Inner Route both with subsets of Eastbound and Westbound. A number of important assumptions have been made, including: Data used has been derived from those vessels drawing 11.0 metres and above to determine the numbers of vessels in the higher draught categories that are transiting the Torres Strait and to provide a broader appreciation of the issues. The economic analysis has focussed on those vessels currently transiting the Torres Strait with a declared draught of 12.20 metres which may have the ability to load deeper if sufficient water depth is available. Vessels in the category of 12.00 to 12.19 metres have been excluded from the analysis although a number of them may have the potential to load deeper if extra depth is available. That all vessels in the economic analysis are loaded and not in ballast. That all vessels drawing less than 12.00 metres are either in ballast, or if loaded, would derive no economic benefit from increased draughts being available. That all Handymax vessels would be able to take advantage of increased loadings, but it should be noted that the gazetted draughts for most of these vessels often does not exceed 12.5 metres. There will be 12.5 metres available for 75% of the year There will be 12.8 metres available for 33% of the year. QAL owned and chartered vessels have been assessed separately to the other vessels. Representative freight rates/tonne have been assumed for each category of vessel 602 vessels of 11.00 metres and over were identified in the ReefRep sample and this correlated reasonably with that recorded in the PAS system except that the latter had about 10% more loaded bulk carriers. No attempt has been made to reconcile the different data bases. Of these vessels, 161 transited at a declared draught of 12.20 metres (excluding QAL).
Page 54
The potential annual economic benefits were calculated by estimating the additional tonnage that could be lifted by category of vessel for each of the two increased draughts assuming representative freight rates and the other assumptions.
10.3
Principle Traffic Flows in the Torres Straits.
QAL moves about 10.6 million tons of bauxite from Weipa to Gladstone and this is a major loaded movement from West to East through the Strait. This trade has been assessed separately. Excluding the major QAL trade, traffic flows along the four routes were identified in the 11.00 metre plus category as follows and as shown in the Table of Figure 16: GNE Eastbound - A total of 105 vessels of which the majority (77) were tankers with many being larger Aframax. However the great majority of tankers pass through the Strait with a draught usually somewhat below 12.00 metres. GNE Westbound Only 20 vessels of which bulk carriers numbered 14. Inner route East and Southbound 142 vessel movements of which 89 were bulk carriers and 46 were container vessels. 56 of the bulk carriers were Panamax size. Inner route North and Westbound This constitutes the major flow with 334 vessels of which 306 were bulk carriers of which 85% were Handymax vessels. 21 were container vessels.
Figure 16 categorizes the flows of various classes of vessel by draught category and secondly into sizes of vessels. It can be seen that there were 161 vessels out of 602 that presented at 12.20 metres but that in the category of 12.00 to 12.19 metres, there were another 129 vessels or about 20% of total transits that were close to the 12.20 maximum draught. It could be argued that such vessels could take some advantage of deeper draughts if it were available. The reasons for these vessels arriving at Torres Strait at such lesser draughts than 12.20 metres is not known. This group of vessels has not been assessed as having an economic benefit in this exercise even though there may be some potential for economic benefit in this category.
Page 55
Fig 16 - SUMMARY OF TRANSITS OF TORRES STRAIT BY VESSELS OF 11.00 METRES DRAFT AND ABOVE. (By nos of vessels, draft and vessel size) EASTBOUND - GNE CHANNELS
No. of vessels Bulk carriers Container vessels General Cargo OBO Tankers Tankers/Specialised tankers TOTALS 28 0 0 0 47 30 105 11 18 38 21 9 43 7 1 13 8 2 11 12 30 64 0 0 6 36 0 36 Draft Draft Draft Draft exactly 11.00 - 11.49 11.50 - 11.99 12.00 - 12.19 12.20 9 13 5 1 No. H'max / Product tankers 22 No. Panamax 6 No. Post Panamax/A framax 0
WESTBOUND - GNE CHANNELS

No. of vessels 14 4 0 0 1 1 20 Draft Draft Draft Draft exactly 11.00 - 11.49 11.50 - 11.99 12.00 - 12.19 12.20 3 5 4 2 3 1 0 0 No. H'max / Product tankers 9 No. Panamax 5 No. Post Panamax/A framax 0
Bulk carriers Container vessels General Cargo OBO Tankers Tankers/Specialised tankers TOTALS
0 1 7
1 0 7
0 0 4
0 0 2
0 1 10
0 0 5
1 0 1
EASTBOUND - INNER ROUTE - EXCLUDING QAL

No. of vessels 89 47 2 3 1 1 143 Draft Draft Draft Draft exactly 11.00 - 11.49 11.50 - 11.99 12.00 - 12.19 12.20 6 16 23 44 29 16 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 3 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 37 34 26 46 No. H'max / Product tankers 33 2 3 1 1 40 No. Panamax 56 0 0 0 0 56 No. Post Panamax/A framax 0 0 0 0 0 0
Bulk carriers Container ships General Cargo OBO Carriers Tanker Tanker/Spec.tanker TOTAL
WESTBOUND - INNER ROUTE - EXCLUDING QAL

No. of vessels 306 21 7 0 0 0 334 Draft Draft Draft Draft exactly 11.00 - 11.49 11.50 - 11.99 12.00 - 12.19 12.20 26 92 86 102 18 3 0 0 4 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 48 98 86 102 No. H'max / Product tankers 258 7 0 0 0 265 No. Panamax 37 0 0 0 0 37 No. Post Panamax/A framax 11 0 0 0 0 11
Bulk carriers Container ships General Cargo OBO Carriers Tanker Tanker/Spec. tanker TOTAL
TOTALS - ALL ROUTES (EXCLUDING QAL)

No. of vessels 437 72 9 3 49 32 602 Draft Draft Draft Draft exactly 11.00 - 11.49 11.50 - 11.99 12.00 - 12.19 12.20 44 126 118 149 50 20 0 2 4 5 0 0 0 0 3 0 12 22 7 8 20 9 1 2 130 182 129 161 No. H'max / Product tankers 322 9 3 12 32 378 No. Post No. Panamax/A Panamax framax 104 11 0 0 0 0 104 0 0 37 0 48
Bulk carriers Container ships General Cargo OBO Carriers Tanker Tanker/Spec. tanker TOTAL
QAL TRADE FROM WEIPA

No. of vessels 145 Draft Draft Draft Draft exactly 11.00 - 11.49 11.50 - 11.99 12.00 - 12.19 12.20 4 10 43 88 No. Handymax 0 No. Panamax 36 No. Post Panamax 109
VESSELS Bulk/Ore carriers
Page 56
10.4
Vessels Limiting Criteria
In addition to the declared draught in Torres Strait of 12.2 metres, there are many other factors that may determine the size of vessel employed in the trades under consideration, notably: Standard bulk vessel sizes: Whereas in the past, the most popular standard size of vessel was the Handysize vessel which had a draught below the 12.20 metre constraint, this has changed in recent years as the Handymax is now the most popular size of ship. However, these ships generally have a draught of about 12.2 metres although many can be up to 12.5metres or higher. Panamax vessels have been increasing in size from the mid 60,000 tonnes to about 75,000 tonnes in recent years with draughts up to about 14 metres but approximately 60,000 tonnes would be the maximum lifting on 12.2 metres. These vessels are normally used for coal and iron ore in the Australian trades. The coal trades from Queensland are growing significantly and are discussed further below. A developing class of bulk carriers is Baby Capes or Post Panamax with a deadweight of around 90,000 tonnes. They have a wide beam and a draught of between about 13 and 14.5 metres and becoming widely used in the coal trades to shallow draught Asian ports especially in Japan. The new vessels being built for QAL are specifically designed for the Weipa to Gladstone trade, but they can be considered to fit into this group. Commercial parcel sizes: Normally determined by the importer. This may in turn be a function of financial outlays required or limitation on storage or for production reasons. Limitations of draught at receiving port: Many ports around the world are shallow draught and it is an expensive and slow process to deepen ports or construct new berths. Many Indian ports (notably Calcutta) have draughts less than 12.2 metres and thus the Torres Strait transit is not a constraint until such ports are deepened or new ports built. Limitations of draught at exporting port: Given the 12.2 metre limitation, there are some ports (notably Weipa) where the dredged depth is or has been virtually linked to or influenced by the available depths in Torres Strait.
10.5
Distances Through the Torres Straits
One crucial factor in assessing the route to be taken will be the distance steamed and all things being equal, the shortest distance will be chosen. The table in Figure 17 indicates that for the majority of routes there are significant savings to be made by using Torres Strait routes when compared to routes either to the north of PNG or alternatively via the Great Australian Bight. Distances to selected representative ports are calculated from Gladstone (based on coal to India) and Singapore (based on liner trades) via alternative routes.
Page 57
FIG. 17 - COMPARITIVE DISTANCE TABLES Distances via Torres Strait FROM GLADSTONE TO:
India - Calcutta India - Visakhapatnam Sri Lanka - Colombo Singapore Indonesia - Jakarta Thailand - Sattahip Yenen - Aden 5,221 5,144 5,047 3,575 3,220 4,209 7,090 5,995 5,918 5,912 4,349 4,105 4,669 7,969 6,418 6,368 5,978 5,028 4,571 5,731 7,636
North of PNG
Australian Bight
FROM SINGAPORE TO:

New Zealand - Auckland Australia - Brisbane 5,058 3,840 5,360 4,450 5,422 4,858
Note: If proceeding from Hay Point in lieu of Gladstone - Distances via Torres Strait and north of PNG need to be reduced by about 225 miles while those via the Bight need to be increased by the same amount.
For the coal and liner trades, approximately 800 miles can be saved by using Torres Strait as opposed to going north of PNG. At 14 knots, this equates to about 2.5 days steaming. However, there is a considerable variation around this figure depending on the geographical location of the country and port concerned.
10.6
Economic Issues for Consideration
For dry and liquid bulk carriers, the principle consideration when determining whether they will route their vessel through the Torres Strait will be on the basis of economics and in particular:The shortest distance from origin to destination if falling within the 12.2 metres limiting constraint. The potential to lift additional cargo to 12.8 metres (or the maximum future draught) if loadline/freeboard limits are not exceeded while still using the Torres Strait The potential to load to maximum draught and earn revenue over and above additional time and costs incurred through a route deviation north of PNG. Loss of revenue by restricting the draught to 12.2 metres in the Torres Strait (or whatever increased draught may be permitted) against the cost savings in not taking a longer route. For liner operators, the prime consideration is schedule keeping, rather than maximizing cargo liftings. In calculating costs, an operator would assess the daily cost of operating the vessel, the daily bunker consumption and the price of fuel as well as pilotage costs in the Torres Strait that would not be incurred if going north of PNG.
Page 58
10.7
10.7.1
Major Trades Using Torres Straits and the Economic Benefits

Bauxite Weipa to Gladstone
This is the major regular trade with a single customer that is committed by geography to use the Strait. The trade has grown continuously over the years to the present where some 10,100,000 tons of bauxite is required annually. This is currently carried by: 122 voyages in QAL vessels at about 70,000 tons 25 voyages in chartered Panamax vessels at 60,000 tons = 8,600,000 tons = 1,500,000 tons
The QAL vessels were built specifically for the trade but have now reached the end of their economic/technical lives and will shortly be replaced. It is clear that the Panamax vessels that have been chartered have to cut size by around 10,000 tons which is a very significant amount to meet the 12.2 limits. Coupled with the very high demand for Panamax vessels and as a consequence high daily charter and demurrage costs in todays markets, it can be appreciated that there is a major cost impost in this trade due to the 12.2 draught limitation. To gauge a rough idea of the impost, assuming that the existing vessels had the necessary scantlings (strength) to load to 12.5 metres, and assuming they could transit the Strait throughout the year at that draught, and further assuming that Weipa could accommodate that draught on a year round basis, each vessel could load an additional 2,430 tonnes or some 303,750 tonnes if every voyage of the QAL ships carried the additional tonnage. This additional tonnage could have eliminated some five charter voyages at an estimated cost of some A$3.5 4.0 million at todays market levels. However this calculation is virtually redundant given that the vessels are soon to be scrapped as they are currently 24 years old and coming to the end of their lives. Rio Tinto has five new vessels on order, each of 236 metres length and 43 metres beam with a designed deadweight of about 90,000 tonnes. The scantling draught for the vessels is 12.8 metres, i.e. 0.6 metres deeper than the current limits of 12.2 metres. The anticipated cargo lifting on 12.2 metres is 82,000 tonnes or approximately 2.5 million tonnes/year/vessel. Thus four vessels are just sufficient to lift current requirements of 10.1 million tones assuming that the higher liftings can be loaded and discharged within the current timeframes. The demand for bauxite is anticipated to grow at about 1.0% pa or about 101,000 tons per year. If each of the new vessels could load to 12.5 metres throughout the year, this would equate to about 2,670 tonnes per voyage or about 84,000 tons of additional capacity per year per vessel or some 85% of the annual growth. In the change over period where old vessels are being phased out and new ones being introduced, it will be in QALs interests to eliminate as many of the chartered vessels as fast as possible, so they are keen to take advantage of deeper draughts if they are available. For each chartered voyage eliminated, a saving of about A$0.75 million could be achieved. Evidence has been produced by Australian Reef Pilots that it would be possible to transit the Straits at 12.5 metres for about 75% of the year and in addition it would be possible to transit the Straits at 12.8 metres for about 33% of the year.. Assuming the new ships can load to their scantling draught of 12.8 metres for 33% of the year and at 12.5 metres for 75% of the year, the average lifting per voyage for each vessel would be about 84,877 as opposed to about 82,000 on 12.2 metres. While the daily operating costs of the new vessels have not yet been determined by QAL (and would in any case be confidential to them), if a daily operating cost of $60,000 per day were to be ascribed to each vessel, the increased productivity through the increased lifting would amount to about $0.30 per ton or $3.0 million per annum for the required throughput of 10,000,000 tonnes. This economic benefit has been calculated on the assumption that there would be no draught constraints at Weipa due to tides, or alternatively that Weipa could be deepened. It is noted in Figure 16 in the year under review that a number of QAL transits were made at less than 12.20 metres (almost 40%). However 90% of all transits were made at a draught of 12.00 metres and above.
10.7.2
Manganese - Groote Eylandt to Bell Bay
About 300,000 tons/year of manganese ore is shipped from Groote Eylandt to Bell Bay in 40,000 ton parcels i.e. about 8 vessels/year. In this case, the limiting draught is 11.5 metres in Bell Bay so no economic benefit to this trade would accrue through additional water depth in Torres Strait. There are no plans to deepen Bell Bay. Manganese ore to other ports throughout the world can be readily accommodated without the need to use Torres Strait.
10.7.3
Coal Queensland Ports to India and Elsewhere.
Queensland Ports (Dalrymple Bay & Hay Point being major ports) exported some 15.5 million tons of coking and thermal coal to India in 2005-614. It is estimated that this trade will continue to grow at the current rate of about 7% per annum despite the fact that India is a major coal producer and exporter. Indian coals apparently have a high dust and sulphur content and are not suitable for the iron and steel industries. There are a number of steel producing plants located around India, notably four plants operated by the Steel Authority of India and located substantially inland of, but probably within the catchment area of Calcutta (subject to more detailed research). Other major plants operated by Vizag Steel and Essar Steel are located at Visakhapatnam (deep draught port) and Hizari respectively. The Indian Port Authority has a strategy to develop ports through Public Private Partnerships. It is understood that plans to develop ports capable of handling larger ships are under consideration. Indian ports (with the exception of Visakhapatnam) are therefore a constraining factor in ascertaining potential benefits of deeper water in Torres Strait. In addition, port development, especially at Hizari is an indication that some of the coal trades can be transferred to larger vessels in the foreseeable future. The coal exporting terminals indicate that there is a trend towards larger tonnage, being Handymax of up to about 55,000 Deadweight being used. This size of vessel has a draught that is generally up to about 12.2 metres or the maximum permissible in Torres Strait, so there would be no benefit from deeper water. A few Handymax vessels could however be loaded to about 12.5 metres. Additional tonnage could be lifted in either a Panamax vessel that is restricted to 12.2 metres or possibly a Panamax that could be operated at a deeper draught if higher water depths were available, although Indian ports may still be restricted in the size and type of vessel that could be accommodated. A saving of about US$0.70/tonne might be achieved under this scenario although it would be more economic to go round the north of PNG with a fully loaded Panamax if the Indian receiving port could accommodate the greater draught. With a major proportion of cargoes being carried in Handymax vessels, the ongoing development of the trade from Queensland ports resulting from the industrialization of India, it is worth considering potential future volumes at various growth rates for the next ten years15. Figure 18 sets out the potential tonnage scenario using high, medium and low growth estimates from a 2006 base of statistics compiled by the Queensland Department of Mines and Energy and from this the potential number of Handymax vessels required assuming no transfer of tonnages to higher capacity vessels. Conceivably there is a major economic benefit in this area if present growth rates are continued and Indian Ports are not developed. This has not been included in the computation of economic benefit in this exercise.
Queensland Dept of Mines and Energy export sales statistics 24/10/2006 with base figures being used in the projections 15 Queensland Dept of Mines and Energy export sales statistics 24/10/2006 with base 2006 figures being used for the projections, based on TCS estimates from coal terminal information. Thompson Clarke Shipping Pty Ltd Page 60
14
Fig. 18 Anticipated growth rates - Coal to India Tonnage projections - Growth rates from 2006 base High 7.0%
15,474 16,557 17,716 18,956 20,283 21,703 23,222 24,848 26,587 28,448 30,440
% Growth
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Medium 5.0% Projected tonnes ('000s)

15,474 16,248 17,060 17,913 18,809 19,749 20,737 21,773 22,862 24,005 25,205
Low 3.0%
15,474 15,938 16,416 16,909 17,416 17,939 18,477 19,031 19,602 20,190 20,796
NOS. OF HANDYMAX VESSELS REQUIRED Average cargo lift 51,000 51,000 51,000 High 7.0%
303 325 347 372 398 426 455 487 521 558
% Growth
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Medium 5.0%
303 319 335 351 369 387 407 427 448 471
Low 3.0%
303 313 322 332 341 352 362 373 384 396
2016 597 494 408 Source: Queensland Dept of Mines & Energy with interpretations and projections by Thompson Clarke Shipping.
These are substantial tonnages for a rapidly growing trade. On a Handymax vessel, the ability to increase the draught in Torres Strait to 12.5 metres would allow the largest Handymax vessels to be used with an additional tonnage of about 1,800 tonnes being possible. Such a tonnage would represent about US$0.80/tonne productivity gain. If this applied to say 10 million tones of coal, the potential productivity gain could be US$8 million. A major caveat is the un-researched current and future status of Indian ports as well as better estimates of growth in this trade. In view of the potential benefits that might accrue from deeper water in the Torres Strait and the benefits to Australian exports, this trade would appear to be worth a more detailed investigation in association with ongoing research into water depths in Torres Strait.
Page 61
Substantial volumes of Queensland coal move from ports to various nations that could justify using the Torres Strait in terms of being the shortest distance and then via the Suez Canal or to SE Asia or the Middle East. Some of these countries (receiving over 1.0 million tons per year) together with other countries in 2005/6 include: Belgium France Germany Italy Holland Spain Sweden United Kingdom Misc. countries (12) TOTAL 2,176,000 4,793,000 1,709,000 2,644,000 4,902,000 3,256,000 1,171,000 4,524,000 4,135,000 29,310,000
Source: Queensland Dept. of Mines and Energy 24/10/06
It is understood from the coal terminals that on account of the long routes involved to these countries, most of exports are carried in Cape Size or fully loaded Panamax, vessels and thus would receive no economic benefit from increased water depths in Torres Strait.
10.8
Tankers
In the 11.00 metre plus draught category, the principle tanker trade using the Torres Strait goes Eastbound via the GNE Channel and amounts to about 81 movements annually. Of these about 37 are the larger Aframax tankers while the others are considered to comprise product tankers (about 45,000 Dwt). The number of tankers transiting the Torres Strait at exactly 12.2 metres is quite small at about 10 per year although there were 39 vessels transiting between 11.5 and 12.2 metres. Whether this is due to tanker owners being cautious through adding in a further margin for safety or whether this is due to draught restrictions at load or discharge ports is not known. Given that there are a considerable number of Aframax vessels capable of being loaded to draughts deeper than 12.2 metres, there may be some potential economic benefit to be gained if a greater depth of water could be guaranteed for tanker owners.
10.9
Container Vessels
About 46 container vessels greater than 11.00 metres move from West to East through the Strait as opposed to only 21 moving north and westbound direction. However only two vessels transited the Straits at the maximum draught of 12.2 metres in the period under review.
10.10
Other Trades
As a major exporter, Australia (and particularly Queensland in the Torres Strait scenario) exports many commodities that often move in bulk carriers including concentrates, metals, sugar, silica sand, wheat and grains, etc. which utilizes bulk carriers and constitutes a large proportion of the bulk carriers moving north and West through the Torres Strait.
10.11
Potential Economic Benefits
In Section 10.7.1, the potential future economic benefits to owners for the QAL trades were estimated at around A$3.0 million, although currently with short term chartered tonnage, those benefits could be considerably higher. This calculation assumes that QAL vessels can always load to the deeper draught without any Weipa constraints.
Page 62
Of the 602 vessels that transited the Straits during the year under review, 161 transited at the maximum draught of 12.20 metres. Assuming that all of the 161 vessels could take advantage of extra depths to 12.5 and 12.8 metres (subject to constraints already discussed on Handymax vessels and allowing for periods of restricted draught as calculated by Australian Reef Pilots), Figure 19 sets out the potential economic benefits that may accrue if there were an additional 30 cm (12.5 metre draught) or 60 cm (12.8 metre draught). This indicates that the potential economic benefits to owners under a 12.5 metre scenario may amount to approximate A$7.15 million plus A$3.0 million for the future QAL shipping program, making A$10.15 million in total. The potential economic benefits to owners under a 12.8 metre scenario may amount to approximate A$10.3 million plus A$3.0 million for the future QAL shipping program, making A$13.3 million in total. Important caveats that apply to both scenarios are that destination ports and/or origin ports may have draught limitation which will prevent vessels loading the additional tonnage. Similarly, commercial necessities of storage, production and financing may restrict parcel sizes and the ability to use additional draughts. A further important caveat under the 12.8 metre scenario is that many vessels in the Handymax category or product tankers have a maximum gazetted draught of about 12.5 metres. The numbers of vessels that could take advantage of the additional 30 cm may be limited. However, there is an ongoing trend to increase the sizes of vessel and the tonnages lifted in one bottom and it is reasonable to assume that such caveats may be less important in the future. Three areas that may have potential to produce some future economic benefits from increased depths are: (a) Those vessels currently transiting the Straits where the draught falls marginally short of 12.2 metres ie within the range of say 12.0 12.19 metres. (b) Tankers currently transiting the Straits with draughts in the range of 11.5 to 12.19 metres which are not included in the current calculations (c) Increased numbers of vessel transits due to the growth in the coal trades particularly, and in other bulk trades in general
Page 63
Figure 19 - POTENTIAL FOR ECONOMIC BENEFITS
POTENTIAL ECONOMIC BENEFITS TO BE DERIVED FROM AN ADDITIONAL 0.30 METRES TO 12.5 METRES VESSELS WITH CURRENT DRAFT OF 12.2 METRES - (EXCLUDING QAL) Potential Potential additional extra Assumed tonnage lifted / Frt rate/ton revenue / Potential extra vessel (US$) vessel revenue / All vessels Tonnes US$ US$ US$ ('000) A$ ('000) 1,350 25 33,750 2,801 3,735 1,575 20 31,500 2,079 2,772 1,238 60 74,250 149 198 1,238 60 74,250 0 0 1,170 2,363 22 15 25,740 35,438 51 284 5,364 69 378 7,152
No. of vessels Bulk Carriers (incl OBO's) Handymax Panamax & post panamax Container Ships General Cargo ships Tankers and Spec. tankers Product & Spec. tankers Aframax tankers POTENTIAL ECONOMIC BENEFIT 83 66 2 0 2 8 161
POTENTIAL ECONOMIC BENEFITS TO BE DERIVED FROM AN ADDITIONAL 0.60 METRES TO 12.8 METRES VESSELS WITH CURRENT DRAFT OF 12.2 METRES - (EXCLUDING QAL) - (SEE NOTE)
No. of vessels Bulk Carriers (incl OBO's) Handymax (see note) Panamax Container Ships General Cargo ships Tankers and Spec. tankers Product tankers (see note) Aframax tankers POTENTIAL ECONOMIC BENEFIT 83 66 2 0 2 8 161
Potential Potential additional extra Assumed tonnage lifted / Frt rate/ton revenue / Potential extra vessel (US$) vessel revenue / All vessels Tonnes US$ US$ US$ ('000) A$ ('000) 1,944 25 48,600 4,034 5,378 2,268 20 45,360 2,994 3,992 1,782 60 106,920 214 285 1,782 60 106,920 0 0 1,685 3,402 22 15 37,066 51,030 74 408 7,724 99 544 10,298
Note: Many Handymax vessels and Product tankers may be unable to load to 12.8 metres being restricted by their scantling drafts and freeboard and thus the potential economic benefits may be overstated in this case.
10.12
Tidal Windows
One of the benefits of a real-time Under Keel Clearance system relates to the opening of the tidal window for vessels restricted by their draught. In the case of the Torres Strait this would only apply to vessels that were, for instance, restricted by their departure draught from Weipa and not seeking to take advantage of any additional draught available under a real-time UKC system. Their advantage would be the ability to start their transit earlier which could assist in making a tide at a destination port. Currently the Weipa bauxite vessels adjust their speed to arrive at the entrance to the Torres Strait at a time that coincides with the required depth to allow them to commence their transit so delays are currently not an issue. No meaningful information exists on delays to vessels awaiting transit of the Torres Strait so trying to put any figure on the economic gain of wider opening windows is almost impossible.
Page 64
11
11.1
OPERATIONAL MODELS AND GOVERNANCE General
It is not the intent of this section to provide a specific recommendation in relation to operational models and governance in relation to the implementation of a real-time UKC system within the Torres Strait, but rather to identify, assess and discuss the following: 1. the primary options for implementation and operational implications, 2. the key consideration variants within the primary options, and 3. the implications on AMSA of the primary options and key consideration variants given AMSAs role as maritime safety regulator for the waterways of the Torres Strait.
11.2
Primary Options
Although there are a number of potential consideration variants, in general, there are only two (2) primary options available for the operation and governance of a real-time UKC System within the Torres Strait as follows: 1. Primary Option 1: A single AMSA Managed Service whereby AMSA acquires a real-time UKC System and provides both service governance and day to day operation (using either public sector staffing or an outsourced private sector operator) to implement a common use system for all designated vessel transits within the Torres Strait region. Primary Option 2: One or more Private Sector Managed Services whereby AMSA establishes a governance framework for the implementation of a private sector market for the establishment and operation of real-time UKC services by private sector operators on a commercial and competitive basis for designated vessel transits within the Torres Strait region.
2.
11.3
11.3.1
Consideration Variants in Both Primary Options

General
Common to each of the above two primary options are a number of key considerations relating to method of implementation and operation of a UKC system and its related service provision in the Torres Strait. The key considerations applicable to the above options can be summarised as: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. The method by which a UKC System is acquired; The approach to establishment, ownership and support of the required real-time met-ocean data collection devices and associated distribution network; The method of operation and staffing of a UKC service provider; The system architecture and need for on-shore pilotage support; and The prime purpose and initial intent of implementing a UKC service within the Torres Strait.
Each of which is briefly discussed in the following subsections prior to discussion on the two primary options.
11.3.2
Method by Which a UKC System is Acquired
Potential options for acquisition include the following: (a) Development of a new green field UKC software product and related system by the UKC service operator;
Page 65
(b) Procurement of a UKC software system from a software vendor (similar to the procurement of any commercial windows software product); or (c) Procurement of a license to operate a UKC system from an application service provider (with software support, maintenance and software upgrades provided by the application service provider). Irrespective of the primary option adopted, the only viable consideration for system acquisition is option (c) above given that neither OMC nor VMS provide an option to buy the software product (ie option (b)), but rather offer the right to operate the system under license. Key benefits of this approach are that the system is being fully supported, maintained and upgraded by those best able to do so (i.e. the system developers). Option (a) is not considered viable given the significant investment in both time and finances required, and the need for the UKC service provider (either AMSA or private sector service provider depending on primary option adopted) to acquire the necessary technical and software systems development expertise.
11.3.3
Approach to Establishment, Ownership and Support of the Required Real Time Met-Ocean Data Network
In general, possible options include a single real-time met-ocean data network that is owned and operated by AMSA irrespective of the primary option adopted, or the establishment of one or more private sector owned and operated met-ocean data networks. Within Primary Option 1 (i.e. Single AMSA Managed Service), whilst it is possible for the real-time met-ocean data network to be provided by the private sector, it is unlikely to be a viable option based on the following: AMSA already has existing operations and maintenance contracts for AtoN under which the metocean data collection devices and associated communications services could be implemented and supported through augmentation. Given the significance of this data in provision of the overall UKC service, the risk associated with the provision and accuracy of this data are best managed by AMSA as the overall single service provider. Within Primary Option 2 (i.e. One or More Private Sector Managed Services), there is an argument to suggest that the establishment of a network of met-ocean data collection devices would also best be undertaken by AMSA, with the associated met-ocean data made available to all potential private sector providers of real-time UKC services. This argument is supported by the following: The real-time met-ocean data is a common requirement of all private sector providers of real-time UKC determination services, therefore it is economically appropriate for it to be provided by the government, and prevents the potential for un-necessary duplication of individual data collection devices within the Torres Strait region. In theory, depending on the method of communication and data distribution, there exists the possibility for government to charge for the use of the resulting data. Within the context of commercialisation and the role of government, the met-ocean data network is part of the enabling framework for the establishment of a real-time UKC market, and therefore a government deliverable. AMSA has existing operations and maintenance contracts for NAVAIDs under which the metocean data collection devices and associated communications services could be supported. The provision of an AMSA owned and operated met-ocean data collection device network is consistent with the NOAA PORTS system in the US. The PORTS system is a national initiative, enabling a regulated and formalised monitoring, collation and distribution of met-ocean data by
NOAA for application by the maritime community as decision support information with distribution achieved through VTS, AIS and other means. Refer to Section 5.3 of this report for more details on PORTS. As identified by AMSA during the course of this study, AMSA already provides real-time tidal advice within the Torres Straits for which it accepts no liability for the presence of errors or consequential use. As a result, it is possible that a similar no liability regime could be enacted for provision of real-time met-ocean data in a form that was suitable for use by private sector UKC service providers. Conversely, there are a number of potential risks, issues and other considerations associated with an AMSA owned and operated met-ocean data network intended to provide services to multiple private sector users; all of which would support an opposing argument. These include: Although there may be an ability to implement a no liability regime similar to that provided for tidal data by AMSA within the Torres Strait, there will always exist some level of liability (whether real or perceived) on AMSA to ensure the correctness and validity of the disseminated data, which would need to be accepted by AMSA. In the US PORTS network, this liability is managed through the implementation of an overlayed NOAA network management system that is responsible for undertaking an integrity check on all data provided by the network every 6 minutes. Although the liability could be perceived to be onerous, it could be suggested that the liability for data integrity imposed on AMSA for such a network is no different to that which is already imposed on AMSA for all their other owned and operated navigational aids. However, in accordance with recognised principles for a public private partnership or commercialisation framework, it could be argued that AMSA is more capable of monitoring and managing the risk associated with data integrity (when compared with the private sector real-time UKC service providers), and should therefore maintain ownership of that risk. Based on the advice from VMS and OMC as detailed earlier in this report, there are potentially differing views from each potential systems/service provider as to the type, number and location of met-ocean data collection devices. Therefore, this creates an implementation issue that would need to be addressed as to what type, how many, and what location met-ocean data collection devices would be implemented if Option 2 were adopted. Although technically possible, there are a number of technical complexities that need to be addressed in the design and implementation to enable an accessible by multiple users method of data collection and dissemination. The technical aspects of data management and the means of distribution would also likely be more difficult in a whole of market access regime as opposed to a situation where the devices were being established for use by a single user. It is anticipated that the most applicable method of dissemination of data would be via AIS, given its intended role overall in the maritime sector as a source of related information (which will potentially provide coverage at the shore based location as well as at sea). However there are a variety of other theoretically potential means of distribution such as GPRS, VHF/UHF radio general, Inmarsat, etc.
11.3.4
The Method of Operation and Staffing of a UKC Service Provider
The cost of establishing a 24/7 service is significant, with the cost of a single 24/7 operator seat requiring up to 6 full time staff prior to management and operational staff and facilities overheads (eg $600k per seat on an assumed $100k Total Employment Cost per staff member). Consequentially, the implementation of a 24/7 service in either of the two primary options will be most cost effectively achieved through the augmentation of an existing 24/7 service for which complementary services are currently being provided. Within Primary Option 1 (i.e. Single AMSA Managed Service) consideration variants include the establishment of a dedicated public sector operated UKC service, incrementing an existing public sector 24/7 service, or outsourcing operation to a private sector operator on a fee for service basis. Based on the benefits of augmenting a complementary service, REEFREP provides an obvious choice of potential UKC service provider within this primary option, especially given the following:
Page 67
Common tools and facilities (eg radios, radar, etc) as would be required by a new UKC service centre; A common area of operation with inclusion of Torres Strait within the existing REEFREP area; A natural extension to existing services with the inclusion of a Z component to current X and Y vessel movement monitoring components within Torres Strait; and An existing service for which AMSA has a direct interest and financial involvement. Within Primary Option 2 (i.e. One or More Private Sector Managed Services) variant considerations include incorporation of UKC services as part of the existing commercial pilotage service market, or implementation of an independent private sector UKC service provider market. As per the complementary service augmentation argument, the inclusion of a UKC within the existing 24/7 pilotage service is an obvious consideration within this primary option.
11.3.5
The System Architecture and Need for an On-shore Pilotage Support
Depending on the architectural design of different UKC systems, some UKC systems are intended to function with the use of an on-shore pilot to provide UKC related pilotage assistance to the on-board pilot in the event of failures within the UKC service. Other UKC systems however have an ability to continue normal operation in various failure modes. It is noted in the consultation with VMS (and as noted earlier in this report), that the preferred operational arrangement for the VMS service is the use of an on-shore pilot. It is understood by TCS that the primary application for the on-shore pilot in the VMS solution is to provide navigational advice in the event of a communications failure between the KeelClear processing system (at the shore station) and the PPU and display laptop on board the vessel. This results in a loss of UKC display on-board, as well as a loss of speed and position data from the PPU (as input into the KeelClear processing system), therefore necessitating a manual update of course and speed by the on-shore pilot, and relay of course speed implications on UKC for the remaining transit via voice to the on-board pilot. TCS understands that the OMC DUKC system incorporates a stand alone mode whereby the onboard DUKC system continues to operate in the absence of communications with the shore based processing system, thereby ensuring continued UKC operation for the pilot on-board. It is also understood that the OMC PPU/ DUKC also includes an ability to directly receive met-ocean data from the data collection devices (assuming communications coverage within the waterway) so as to ensure all available input data for the UKC calculation in the event of a loss of communications to shore. No implementation of the OMC UKC system to date has required the adoption of a shore based pilot to ensure continuity of operation.
11.3.6
The Prime Purpose and Intent of Implementing a UKC Service within the Torres Strait.
In general, the purpose and intent of implementing a UKC service within the Torres Strait (at least initially) could be based on either of the following: To enable passage of vessels with draught greater than the existing 12.2 metres, and to provide wider passage windows for existing 12.2 and lesser draught vessels. This intent assumes that met-ocean conditions and ship characteristics will exist that enables such opportunities while maintaining minimum safety requirements. This variant facilitates either an AMSA Managed or Private Sector Managed primary option given the opportunity for higher valued transits; As an additional maritime safety measure in the form of an Aid to Navigation (AtoN) so as to establish data and a better understanding of the Z component of vessel transits through the Torres Strait region. Such information enables future assessment and analysis as to the suitability of existing draught limits in relation to maritime safety, with the potential to adjust draught limits
Page 68
from that currently legislated at some stage in the future (if perceived appropriate) in accordance with more accurately determined safety tolerances. Whereas option (a) above could be adopted within either the Primary Option 1 or 2 scenario, option (b) above is clearly a regulatory function that is more consistent with AMSAs role in providing all other aids to navigation. Option (b) is therefore unlikely to be implemented in the form of a commercial and competitive market as required within Primary Option 2 prior to a future decision to increase draught limits.
11.3.7
Summary of Primary Options and Consideration Variants
The following table provides an overall summary of the primary options and the consideration variants associated with each.
Page 69
Single AMSA Managed Service (Primary Option 1)

Whereby AMSA acquires a real-time UKC System and provides both service governance and day to day operation (using either public sector staffing or an outsourced private sector operator) to implement a common use system for all designated vessel transits within the Torres Strait region.
One or More Multiple Private Sector Managed Services (Primary Option 2)

Whereby AMSA establishes a governance framework for the implementation of a private sector market for the establishment and operation of real-time UKC services by private sector operators on a commercial and competitive basis for designated vessel transits within the Torres Strait region.
Procurement Options: Option 1: Option 2: Option 3: Option 1: Option 2: Option 1: Option 2: Greenfield development Buy UKC system License UKC system (most likely) Private sector owned and operated AMSA owned and operated (most likely) New dedicated service provider eg. New public sector or outsourced service provider Augmentation of existing service eg Include in REEFREP (most likely) Shore based pilotage support (Depends on System) No shore based pilotage support (Depends on System) Implement as a means to increase draught Implement as an Aid to Navigation (most likely)
Procurement Options: Option 1: Option 2: Option 3: Option 1: Option 2: Option 1: Option 2: Option 1: Greenfield development Buy UKC system License UKC system (most likely) Private sector owned and operated AMSA owned and operated (most likely) New dedicated service provider Augmentation of existing service eg Include in pilotage service (most likely) Shore based pilotage support (Depends on System) No shore based pilotage support (Depends on System) Implement as a means to increase draught (most likely) Implement as an Aid to Navigation
Real-Time Met-Ocean Data Network Options:
Real-Time Met-Ocean Data Network Options:
Method of Operation and Staffing:
Method of Operation and Staffing:
System Architecture and Need for On-Shore Pilotage Support: Option 1: Option 2: Option 1: Option 2:
System Architecture and Need for On-Shore Pilotage Support: Option 1: Option 2: Option 1: Option 2:
Prime Purpose and Intent in Implementation
Prime Purpose and Intent in Implementation
Page 70
11.4
11.4.1
One or More Private Sector Managed Services Option

The Operational Arrangements
If a Private Sector Managed Option were adopted, the most feasible private sector managed operation and associated governance model would be based on the following operational framework: For any transit involving a vessel draught of greater than the current 12.2 metre restriction, a real time UKC software system would be used by the pilot to ensure a UKC of no less than an AMSA defined value at all times during the transit. This involves the determination of a forecast UKC plot for the transit prior to entry, as well as continued monitoring of the forecast UKC plot based on course and speed variations (or potential variations) by the on-board pilot using an on-board PPU throughout the transit. The real time UKC software system and intended operating procedures would be accepted by AMSA as suitable for operation on the basis of documented independent evidence as to the technical robustness and capability of the UKC system components and intended operation. AMSAs role in this Acceptance Regime is not one of certifier, but rather as the recipient of independent certification by an appropriate expert party other than the intended private sector provider or system vendor. The Acceptance Regime would be focused on key maritime safety aspects of the intended system and associated operating procedures in accordance with the interests of AMSA as the regulatory authority (i.e. to ensure a maximum acceptable probability of grounding is not exceeded). For any transit involving a vessel draught of 12.2 meters or less, there would be no requirement for the use of a real time UKC software system (ie as per the existing operational framework). As identified by VMS, this would involve the establishment of a commercial and competitive market for real time UKC services as a pilotage tool within the region. This requires the use of an accepted real time UKC system by pilots licensed to operate through the Torres Strait. Accordingly, key characteristics of the operational arrangement advocated could include: All UKC software system based planning of the transit for vessels with a draught greater than 12.2 metres, as well as the conduct of the transit in compliance with the UKC software system based passage plan would be undertaken by pilots as part of the overall pilotage service within the region (i.e. within this model, the real time UKC system is considered to be a pilotage tool in all aspects of its operation). The UKC service utilised by the pilots being owned and operated by the pilot organisation, or procured by the pilot from an alternate private sector UKC service provider. No involvement by AMSA in pre-approval or monitoring of the transit. The application of a commercial levy or fee for service included in the pilotage charges to account for the use of the real time UKC system and related service, with the value of the levy in direct proportion to the additional draught benefits attained (eg charged on a dollar rate per extra centimetre draught beyond 12.2 metres). The consideration variants for the implementation and support of a real time met-ocean data network were identified and discussed previously. As identified, there is a strong argument to suggest that the devices and associated data dissemination network be owned and operated by AMSA, given that AMSA is the associated waterway authority (similar to the application of real time UKC within a port environment).
11.4.2
The Key Role and Responsibilities of AMSA within this Primary Option
In implementing this primary option, AMSA is accepting the existence of sufficient opportunities for increased draught passages (based on met-ocean conditions), and sufficient demand for such passages to enable pilot organisations (or other third parties private operators) to achieve a commercial return on the required cost outlay in establishing a UKC system and an ongoing related commercial UKC service.
Page 71
In satisfying its role as safety regulator, the key tasks required of AMSA in establishing a UKC service within this primary option would include: To establish an acceptance regime by which UKC service providers can have their intended UKC system accepted for use by AMSA on the basis of independent documentary evidence developed by an expert party. The acceptance being limited to validating key maritime safety aspects, and to validate the ability of the system to operate with an AMSA implemented real time met-ocean data network. The intent of the Acceptance Regime is to ensure that new UKC service providers undertaken an appropriate level of independent due diligence on the maritime safety aspects of their proposed UKC system and associated operating procedures; To establish the necessary legislative/regulation changes to permit the passage of deeper draught vessels based on the application of an accepted UKC system; and To establish an AMSA owned and operated real time met-ocean data network suitable for application with differing UKC systems (if this consideration variant is accepted). The key day to day tasks required of AMSA in the operation of a UKC service within this primary option would generally be limited to random auditing of vessel passages and associated pilotage practices to ensure compliance with the real time UKC service framework for nominated deep draught vessels. In addition, AMSA could potentially seek formal lodgement of real time UKC based passage plans prior to entry of the Straits for all associated transits beyond the existing 12.2 metre draught limit. However, AMSAs ability to confirm the correctness or otherwise (ie validate) of the lodged real time UKC based passage plans would be severely limited by the following: AMSA would need to be utilising the exact same real time UKC software system as that used to create the passage plan to ensure a similar result, given that there is no guarantee that any one real time UKC software would provide the same output even with the same input variables (refer discussion in software comparison). In addition, differing real time software systems may also utilise different met-ocean and ship based variables in the UKC derivation. Therefore AMSA would potentially need to own and operate ALL real time UKC software applications utilised by private sector real time UKC service providers. The intent in operating a real time UKC software system with an on-board PPU is that the forecast bottom clearance profile for the remainder of the transit can vary throughout the passage, either due to changing met-ocean conditions or changing course and speed of the vessel. Therefore AMSA may be required to validate continually varying passage plans throughout a single vessel transit. Establishing an AMSA based 24/7 service to validate the real time UKC passage plans negates many of the perceived benefits of this primary option (i.e. why not use that resourcing to operate a common use AMSA managed real time UKC service as per primary option 1, particularly given the need to acquire one or more real time UKC software systems to undertake the validation?). For similar reasons to that identified above, the concept of AMSA operating a third party real time UKC as an oversight tool within this primary option is not feasible.
11.4.3
Example Characteristics of an Acceptance Regime
As part of an acceptance regime, AMSA would require from a potential UKC software vendor and/or associated service provider evidence of an independent assessment of maritime safety implications and risk (given that these are the only real aspects for which AMSA has a regulatory interest) in respect of the proposed UKC system and associated service provision. Therefore, information provided to AMSA as part of the Acceptance Regime would need to include information that independently clarifies the following: the integrity and robustness of the software (i.e. software reliability and accuracy/precision) and the operating system as a whole (i.e. system availability),
the validity of operation based on an established AMSA met-ocean data network (if adopted); and anticipated commercial arrangements and risk/liability acceptance of UKC performance.
The following is a list of specific information that would ideally be provided in support of the above clarification: A definitive statement as to how safety margins are determined and guaranteed within the UKC determination. As noted by TCS during the study, it is difficult to obtain a definitive answer on the above, however the question needs to be asked with an expectation that the vendor or service provider will have to provide sufficient information to provide assurance. This is expected to include clarification on the minimum permitted Bottom Clearance in the absence of all other factor allowances
Identification of a comprehensive list of all real time met-ocean data input considerations that are included in the determination of UKC, and the input data format required by the software system. Ideally this should include a statement to describe the relationship between tolerances on input data, and associated safety margins included in the UKC output. This would include a basis for determining the number, type and location of real time data sources, at least prior to the establishment of an initial system and service provider. Once one or more initial systems and service providers are proven and in operation, this would be presented as a list of minimum operational real time data inputs within the established met-ocean data network that must be accepted by the software to enable a valid UKC result.
A list of perceived applicable maritime standards compliance (i.e. PIANC compliance/certification requirements, and any other perceived standards) A general summary of the algorithms and calculation methodologies utilised (including a statement of perceived differentiating factors when compared with other vendors/systems), including references to associated theories and associated papers, etc. Again as noted by TCS during the study, obtaining a definitive answer on this will be difficult given the perceived intellectual property associated with this information. It is anticipated that within the scope of an acceptance regime, significantly more rigorous confidentiality agreements can be entered into (when compared with this study). As an example, it is understood that OMC have entered into such an arrangement with the Port of Melbourne Corporation as part of their current trial and performance assessment of DUKC.
All UKC outputs as reported and utilised in transits should be documented and recorded in an tamper proof manner (even if not required to be provided as a passage plan to AMSA prior to entry), so as to enable auditing by AMSA and other appropriate authorities as required (whether it be in the event of an incident, or for random compliance auditing). This includes the predicted UKC at all stages of a transit, from prior to waterway entry as well as all updates provided to the pilot throughout the transit.
In conjunction with each transit based UKC output, there is a requirement to include a documented and definitive statement of all utilised real time inputs, and the values of those inputs as registered and utilised in the software calculation. This should also include any other key assumptions applicable to the UKC forecast derived. This also serves to facilitate confirmation or otherwise of correct real time data information as provided by an AMSA met-ocean data network if required. This information can be compared against data recorded in the network management system utilised by AMSA in monitoring the integrity of the AMSA met-ocean data output.
Information in support of a high software reliability requirement.

In reference to Section 6.7.2, this includes any information as to the incorporation of quality in software design and development (i.e. systems engineering standards compliance, etc), and product maturity. In reference to Section 6.7.3, this includes any information to quantify or at least qualify the effectiveness of the algorithms and theories used as noted previously. In reference to Section 6.7.4, this includes clarification of redundancy and fail over mechanisms incorporated into the service provision, clarifying the use of high availability components, as well as defining the operations and maintenance strategy that will be utilised to ensure high availability compliance. Of all the integrity and robustness measures, this criterion is one which can be quantified at least in a rudimentary way, and justified on the basis of system architecture drawings, reliability block diagrams, availability calculations, and other quantification and derivation tools and techniques.
Information in support of a high software accuracy and precision requirement. -
Information in support of a high system availability requirement. -
A clear statement of risk and liability acceptance by the service provider and software vendor, including associated contractual terms and conditions associated with service provision and risk sharing. This can be accompanied by a stated minimum requirement or expectation. For an acceptance regime to be considered a ground truthing approach to validating the adequacy of a real time UKC system, the regime also needs to include a field trial (as identified in Section 6.7of the report). A field trial would be the final stage of an acceptance regime, following provision of the information identified above and acceptance by AMSA of the adequacy of the submitted information. If an AMSA owned and operated met-ocean data network was not adopted, then the field trial would also require the establishment of all data collection devices perceived necessary for that particular software system, as well as a sufficiently large sample size of transits to confirm alignment of the predicted UKC result with that of the actual UKC. As also identified in Section 6.7, the field trial would need to include a sufficiently high number of multiple transits to statistically demonstrate a less than maximum permissible tolerance between derived UKC and actual as measured during the trial transits.
11.4.4
Key Benefits of a Private Sector Managed Operation
In reflecting the VMS quoted benefits of a private sector managed operation, plus other comments and/or observations as noted by TCS throughout this study, a summary of key benefits of a private sector managed operation is as follows: Lowest possible cost to AMSA, given that all costs (other than Acceptance Regime activities, and a supporting multi-use real time met-ocean data collection and dissemination network) will be incurred by private sector service providers (at no risk to AMSA). Provides the most potential for transferring risk from AMSA to the private sector. However, a successful public private partnership or commercialisation framework incorporates a requirement for risk allocation between public and private parties based on a best positioned to manage criteria. Therefore there will be a limit to the extent to which risk can be passed to the private sector which needs to be appropriately assessed and adopted. It is consistent with the overall commercialisation concept of Torres Strait pilotage, as long as real time UKC determination is considered a valid component of pilotage, and a valid risk to outsource. A private sector service provider can incorporate complementary services of a commercial nature (i.e. non maritime safety) in addition to a UKC determination service. Such commercial services are unlikely to be provided as part of an AMSA managed operation given its principle role is to facilitate safety regulation and compliance. For example, it is unlikely that an AMSA managed
Page 74
operation would include long range UKC determination so as to facilitate cargo loading at port of origin (particularly if the port of origin is more than approx 36hrs sailing from the Torres Strait). VMS believe that a real time UKC service could not be provided without the use of an on-shore pilot to provide assistance in the event of communications failure. Therefore suggesting that the service could not effectively be provided by AMSA without retracting from the current commercialised pilotage operation within the Torres Strait region. However, as noted by TCS, there is an argument to suggest that the requirement for an on-shore pilot is a characteristic of the VMS system architecture (i.e.. the service reliability which is intended to be achieved through the use of an on-shore pilot may well be achieved through alternate means within other vendors systems).
11.4.5
Key Risks and Issues of a Private Sector Managed Operation
In reflecting the risks of a private sector managed operation as identified by OMC, plus other comments and/or observations as noted by TCS throughout this study, a summary of key risks and issues of a private sector managed operation is as follows: The implementation of a private sector managed operation with real time UKC determination made by pilots as part of a pilotage service results in a competitive dynamic UKC regime. There is an argument to suggest that an industry based competitive framework has the potential to introduce an enhanced risk of grounding (when compared with the existing static arrangement), given the commercial pressure to minimise safety margins to maximise market share and commercial profit for any one pilotage service provider (i.e. a direct conflict of interest between achieving competitive draughts and ensuring safety margins). Compulsory pilotage has been introduced to the Torres Strait and IGBR to enhance safety, however the industry model proposed for a private sector managed operation has an incentive for pilotage providers to achieve economic benefit by potentially reducing UKC margins and increasing risk of groundings. While this does not necessarily imply that the regime is of less risk than the current static regime (or alternate ASMA managed operations), the complexity of UKC algorithms, determination and true risk clarity however makes it difficult for AMSA to confidently assess the risk inherent in any proposed UKC transit forecast provided by the pilotage providers. It can be argued that this operational framework has the potential to cloud AMSAs liability in respect of their receipt and acceptance of UKC advice from pilots in the event of an incident, particularly given AMSAs difficulty in assessing the risk inherent in forecasts derived from a software system that was selected, assessed and procured by others. The acceptance regime will only provide limited visibility of software performance to AMSA, and is not intended (nor is it possible) for this regime to be a means by which AMSA can confidently confirm performance and correctness. Assuming safety concerns can be addressed, the operational model of establishing a competitive real time UKC component within the commercialised pilotage regime would only be effective if accepted by all operating pilots. As reported to TCS during consultation, the Torres Strait pilots expressed significant reservation in respect of this regime given the implied pressure to minimise or reduce safety margins for commercial gain. In particular, the perceived conflict of interest between an imposed safety obligation and a significant commercial incentive. As the only other known vendor of a an existing real time UKC software system (and arguably the only provider of a commercially proven and currently operational real time UKC system), OMC have also stated grave reservation in participating in the fiercely competitive pilotage market given the incentive to compromise safety (and the indirect implications for OMC in the world market if a grounding incident were to result). The availability of proven software products is sufficiently scarce to create a situation where the Torres Strait pilots potentially have no opportunity to source an alternate product. This operating framework creates a situation whereby two (or more) industry operated real time UKC systems could provide conflicting advice (involving differing levels of risk, or differing algorithms producing differing results for the same quoted risk). AMSA would have no clearly
defined independent means to determine which (if any) of the resulting UKC and associated risks are within acceptable limits, or to be able to confidently assess the validity of each. The application of two independent real time UKC systems on passing vessel transits in the same waterway (and piloted by different pilotage providers) is unlikely to include appropriate allowances for the effect of passing on UKC, thereby introducing an unknown and excluded allowance factor in the optimised UKC determination by each. The private sector managed operation model does not effectively enable AMSA to gate transits through the Torres Strait using a go/no go safety restriction and approval function for individual transits. Even if there was a requirement for pilotage providers to lodge a passage plan, it would be a rubber stamping exercise at best, given the inability for AMSA to truly and suitably assess the correctness or otherwise of the calculated UKC intended for a transit through the acceptance regime. In the absence of a separately imposed reporting and monitoring regime, a private sector managed operation provides no visibility to AMSA of vessel movements and changing UKC implications during a Torres Strait transit.
11.5
11.5.1
Single AMSA Managed Service Option

Prime Purpose and Intent of an AMSA Managed Service
As identified in Section 11.3.6, the purpose and intent of implementing a real time UKC system within the Torres Strait by AMSA could be either:
a) To enable passage of vessels with draught greater than the existing 12.2metres, and
to provide wider passage windows for existing 12.2 and lesser draught vessels. This intent assumes that the existing 12.2 metre draught limit is safe in relation to its current regulatory application as a draught limit. This intent also assumes that suitable met-ocean conditions and ship characteristics will exist that enable opportunities for vessels with draught exceeding 12.2 meters, while still maintaining minimum safety standards,
b) As an additional maritime safety measure in the form of an Aid to Navigation(AtoN) so

as to establish an increased understanding of the Z component of vessel transits through the Torres Strait region. This intent implies no assumption in relation to the safety of the existing 12.2 metre draught limit and regulatory application, with implementation intended to achieve a real time measurement and forecast system for UKC, as well as confirming necessary UKC safety margins for associated transits. The data and associated information derived from its implementation enables future assessment and analysis as to the suitability of existing draught limits in relation to maritime safety, with the potential to adjust draught limits and operational practices at some stage in the future (if perceived appropriate) in accordance with more accurately determined safety tolerances. The most probable operational arrangements for each intent is identified briefly in the subsections below, however, in the opinion of TCS, the most favourable implementation intent for an AMSA Managed Service is that identified in (b) above.
11.5.2
The Operational Arrangements with an Intent to Increase Draught
The key characteristics of an AMSA managed operation and associated governance model with an intent to increase draught would most likely be based on the following operational framework: AMSA would provide a real time UKC gateway in the Torres Strait for all vessels with draught exceeding 12.2 metres.
Page 76
Based on the use of a Common User real time UKC system that is managed by AMSA for the entire waterway (and all overdraught vessels), overdraught vessels are only permitted to enter the waterway if their UKC throughout the transit is determined to be not less than a defined minimum UKC (eg. 1.2 metres or similar, or some other maximum measure of risk of grounding depending on the software adopted). Throughout the transit, and via the application of an on-board PPU, the on-board pilot is required to navigate course and speed to ensure the minimum UKC requirement is assured and maintained at all time throughout the transit for any navigational decisions made that vary from the original passage plan. A go/no go operation would apply in the form of an AMSA gate to enforce a minimum safety requirement, albeit with an ability for industry to achieve additional economic benefit if the characteristics of the waterway, vessel type, and met-ocean conditions permit. The role proposed is similar to the role that port authorities already provide through the application of a Common User real time UKC in port waterways and approaches. If the intent was to increase permissible draught, the most feasible operational arrangement for an AMSA managed operation is that which was advocated by OMC during consultation for this study. In particular, the day to day operation of the real time UKC system would be undertaken by REEFREP, given their complementary role in associated waterways. Accordingly, key characteristics of the operational arrangement could include the following: A vessel planning to pass through the UKC gateway in the near future (eg within 36 hours) would query the state of a pending passage (in regard to UKC anticipated) with a passage plan. REEFREP would provide a predicted tidal window based on the vessels submitted passage plan, enabling the vessel to time its arrival accordingly at the Torres Strait. On or near the time of transit, the pilot would confirm the UKC advice through remote PPU connection to the shore based system. The actual transit UKC safe passage plan would be created at that time and lodged with REEFREP for reference and endorsement (i.e. go / no go decision). The on-board pilot would continue to monitor the UKC throughout the transit based on navigational decisions made, with complete visibility provided to REEFREP operators. REEFREP would monitor the vessel transit in a similar manner to that which they currently undertake for IGBR vessel transits, and would contact the vessel in an information only capacity if perceived necessary.
11.5.3
The Operational Arrangements with an Intent to Provide an Aid To Navigation (AtoN)
The premise for the introduction of a real-time UKC system as an AtoN lies in the obvious advantage of knowing the Z component as well as the X and Y components of the vessel position that can be monitored by a body such as REEFREP. Regardless of whether additional draught can be achieved with the potential for economic benefit, or if the current 12.2m comes under question due to the current data tolerances being outside acceptable limits, the provision of a real-time UKC would give more and better information about UKC that can only be of benefit to the various stakeholders. An AMSA managed operation and associated governance model would most likely be based on the following operational framework: There would be no immediate change to the current 12.2 metre draught limit, however the UKC system (as an additional AtoN) would be applied as a mandatory passage tool for all vessels greater than a nominated real time UKC applicable draught limit (eg 12.0 metres) Based on the use of a common user real time UKC system that is managed by AMSA for the entire waterway, all vessels with draught exceeding the real time UKC applicable draught limit are only permitted to enter the waterway if their UKC throughout the transit is determined to be not
less than a defined minimum UKC (eg. 1.2 metres or similar, or some other maximum measure of risk of grounding depending on the software adopted). Throughout the transit, and via the application of an on-board PPU, the on-board pilot is required to navigate course and speed to ensure the minimum UKC requirement is assured and maintained at all time throughout the transit for any navigational decisions made that vary from the original passage plan. The purpose of the real time UKC system in the Torres Strait is to serve as an Aid to Navigation (AtoN) to facilitate safe passage. In addition, the system provides a means to monitoring and data collation to facilitate AMSA in its role as safety regulator for the waterway concerned. As a monitoring and data collation system, implementation of a real time UKC system in this manner allows for a proving period before any decision is made in relation to changing the current 12.2 metre draught restriction (ie either increasing or decreasing). The implementation of a real time UKC system as an AtoN, including the ability for monitoring and data collation is considered to be a valid activity of AMSA in exercising its role as the safety regulator. The most feasible operational arrangement for an AMSA managed operation within the above framework is similar to that proposed for the intent to increase draught, except the operational arrangements apply to all vessels that exceed the real time UKC draught limit. In particular, the day to day operation of the real time UKC system would be undertaken by REEFREP, with the key characteristics of the operational arrangement potentially including the following: A vessel exceeding the real time UKC draught limit that is planning to transit the Torres Strait within the near future (eg within 36 hours) would query the state of a pending passage (in regard to UKC anticipated) with a passage plan. REEFREP would provide a predicted tidal window based on the vessels submitted passage plan, enabling the vessel to time its arrival at the Straits accordingly. On or near the time of transit, the pilot would confirm the UKC advice through remote PPU connection to the shore based system. An actual transit UKC safe passage plan would be created at that time and lodged with REEFREP for reference and endorsement (i.e. go / no go decision). The on-board pilot would continue to monitor the UKC throughout the transit based on navigational decisions made, with complete visibility provided to REEFREP operators. REEFREP would monitor the vessel transit in a similar manner to that which they currently undertake for IGBR vessel transits, and would contact the vessel in an information only capacity if perceived necessary. Within this model, the real time UKC system not only provides a decision support tool for the pilot (as per the VMS operational model), but is also providing a Z component safety compliance and monitoring capability for REEFREP similar to that already provided by REEFREP for the X and Y components (ie a natural extension to the existing REEFREP capability and function).
11.5.4
The Key Role and Responsibilities of AMSA within this Primary Option
In implementing this primary option, the role and responsibility of AMSA in either of the implementation intents above would include: To select and acquire the most appropriate UKC software system based on a suitable system selection criteria and ground truthing approach to validation and verification. To install and establish all required real time UKC system infrastructure. To establish an AMSA owned and operated real time met-ocean data network suitable for operation with the selected UKC software system, To establish operational procedures based on the operational arrangements identified above for the adopted implementation intent,
To engage/establish the real time UKC operations centre and staffing. To establish the necessary legislative/regulation changes to permit the passage of deeper draught vessels (if intended) or to mandate the utilisation of the real time UKC service for all vessels with draught exceeding the real time UKC applicable draught limit (for an AtoN implementation intent).
11.5.5
Alternate Operators (Government or Private) of an AMSA Managed Operation
While REEFREP is an obvious choice as the operator of an AMSA managed Torres Strait real time UKC system, it is theoretically possible for the operation to be outsourced to an alternate government body or private sector operator (on a fee for service basis). However, given the complementary services already provided to shipping in the surrounding waterways, the natural extension of existing services though real time UKC inclusion, and the ability to utilise existing REEFREP infrastructure and operators in support and application of the UKC service (i.e. radio communications, AIS, radar, etc), no other government or private sector entity operator would provide a more feasible and practical alternative (all things considered including cost).
11.5.6
Example Characteristics of a System Selection Criteria
In the selection and acquisition of a real time UKC software system, an appropriate selection criteria would need to be applied to ensure the system obtained is most appropriate, and to ensure that the operation of the system in relation to safety implications is well understood by AMSA prior to selection. In general, the primary characteristics of the selection criteria for an AMSA operated real time UKC system would involve all the criteria identified and defined in Section 11.4.3 for the Acceptance Regime process in a private sector managed operation. Other key operation aspects of an AMSA operated software system that were not necessarily existent in the Acceptance Regime process for a private sector managed operation include: A waterway based operation as opposed to a single vessel transit operation; therefore the software system must be capable of incorporating factor allowances for managing multiple vessels in the same waterway, such as passing vessels implications on UKC. Although a multi-user accessible met-ocean data collection and dissemination network may still be attractive for other non-UKC related maritime applications, there is no mandated requirement in the AMSA managed operation for a general purpose access capability. This has the potential to result in a lower cost communications network and data management requirement for all components within the system.
11.5.7
Key Benefits of an AMSA Managed Operation
Based on observations as noted by TCS throughout this study, a summary of key benefits of an AMSA managed operation when compared with a private sector managed service (ie Primary Option 2) is as follows: Arguably, this model best optimises and ensures safety while still allowing realisation of commercial and economic benefits beyond the current static draught scheme when the waterway, vessel type, and met-ocean conditions permit (if an increase in draught was to be adopted). All pilotage providers are given equal access to a Common User real time UKC system; thereby ensuring repeatability in quoted UKCs (i.e. avoids the potential of two differing UKC results for a common transit by each of the two pilot organisations). Given that the real time UKC system is an AMSA procured and operated system, in exercising its regulatory role within the waterway AMSA will have an unequivocally clear understanding of the UKC determination and its inherent safety risk and implications. Not only is this made possible
through the fact that the system and service is managed by AMSA, but AMSAs procurement process will also ensure a thorough understanding of its operation and determination through full disclosure (anticipated to require the application of formal non-disclosure agreements). There are significant advantages to integrating the operation of the real time UKC with REEFREP, both from the perspective of the benefits to a real time UKC regime as derived from the existing REEFREP system and service, and benefits to REEFREP in providing an additional control and monitoring capability through the inclusion of a real time UKC capability (i.e. an extension of the existing REEFREP capabilities and facilities to include a Z component, and the increase in available real time vessel movement data). This operational model better facilitates the establishment of a clear and consistent liability regime between AMSA as safety regulator, the UKC system provider, and the pilots; thereby reflecting the rights and obligations of each party and aligned with relevant statutes and existing legal principles. As a total waterway solution that is operated by an entity with total waterway responsibility, this operational model ensures that passing vessel influences on UKC will be identified and included in the UKC determination. It is unlikely that a pilot operated scheme would not include such an allowance given that the focus in determination is a single vessel transit as opposed to total waterways management. This operational model provides an ability for AMSA to reduce the draught limit required for real time UKC determination if perceived necessary as a further risk mitigation measure. This ability would be more limited in the pilot operated scenario given the implications of compliant draught changes on pilotage revenue and industry associated levies charged (as opposed to any increased safety assurance). This more limited ability would apply to any private sector managed regime given the implications on the commercial business case in providing the real time UKC determination service.
11.5.8
Key Risks and Issues of an AMSA Managed Operation
Based on consultation and investigation by TCS throughout this study, a summary of key risks and issues of an AMSA managed operation are as follows: There may be a perception that an AMSA operated real time UKC is contrary to the commercial and contestable regime implemented for pilotage within the region. However, this model implies that determination of UKC limits is a minimum safety requirement that cannot be subjected to commercial pressures between competing private sector service providers, and therefore the sole responsibility of the waterways owner/manager. Similarly, the exclusion of UKC from private sector determination can also be argued on the basis of maintaining risks with the party best positioned to managed and control the risk. A private sector service provider can incorporate complementary services of a commercial nature (i.e. non maritime safety) in addition to a UKC determination service. Such commercial services are unlikely be provided as part of an AMSA operated service given its principle role is to facilitate safety regulation and compliance. For example, it is unlikely that an AMSA managed operation would include long range UKC determination so as to facilitate cargo loading at port of origin (particularly if the port of origin is more than approx 36hrs sailing from the Torres Strait). However, independent commercial products can always be procured by industry from real time UKC software providers such as OMC or VMS for long range UKC forecast applications and commercial decision making. Highest capital and operational cost to AMSA, albeit the incorporation of real time UKC into REEFREP ensures that operational costs are minimised (i.e. an incremental cost only), and additional navigational/waterways monitoring functions are achieved.
11.5.9
Additional Benefits of the AtoN Intent
As implied throughout the above discussion, in the opinion of TCS, the most appropriate implementation intent for an AMSA Managed Service is as an additional maritime safety measure in
the form of an Aid to Navigation (AtoN). In comparison with an intent to increase draught, the most significant added benefits of the AtoN intent include: best justifies the implementation of a UKC System by AMSA, given the role of AMSA in providing AtoN facilities and services; best justifies the integration of the UKC service within REEFREP, as an additional monitoring tool to include the Z component in addition to the current X and Y as currently monitored in the REEFREP area; enables AMSA to obtain a more definitive measure of the existing safety margin within the current legislated draught limit; enables a sound basis for future changes to legislated draught limits (either up or down) based on accurate measures of UKC, including a potential draught increase that is conditional upon an AMSA managed Common Use UKC service; and best serves to mitigate other commercial sensitivities and reputational risks for AMSA.
11.6
Potential Operational Issues
There are a number of issues that will need consideration as part of the verification process prior to the introduction of a real time UKC system:
11.6.1
Approval Processes for Input Data
The validity of the input data for a real time UKC system would have to be declared by the system provider as part of the due diligence necessary to assess the veracity of any system under consideration. AMSA would need to seek written assurances from the system providers that the information they were using to calculate UKC was the best available and had been approved for use by the authority providing the base data ie AHO, NTC. Field testing and Quality Assurance procedures would assist in checking the validity of information. see Section 6 and 8.
11.6.2
Software and Hardware Redundancy
As has been mentioned elsewhere in this report the two systems analysed, OMC and VMS, both have fallback positions in the case of hardware or software failure.
11.6.3
Multiple High Tide Arrivals
The control of vessels transiting the Torres Strait needs to remain with the regulatory authority through the REEFCENTRE monitoring system regardless of what option is considered appropriate for the introduction of a real time UKC system. This is easily achieved as all deep draught vessels are required to carry a pilot. Some form of booking system would control the arrival of multiple vessels for the same tide and the transit sequence could be controlled taking into account vessel characteristics and draught. Historically this does not appear to have been a problem for vessels currently restricted by draught.
11.6.4
Draught Verification
The question of responsibility for draught declaration and verification will never be an easy one to resolve. Currently it is incumbent upon the master of a vessel to declare his draught with no other check occurring immediately before a vessel transits the Strait. For vessels coming from ports within a days steaming of the Torres Strait (eg. Weipa) a visual check can be easily made prior to departure from the loading port that would not change significantly prior to transit. A vessel coming from a much greater distance would probably have a calculated draught that may or may not be accurate. Realistically, the only way to verify draught is to sight it over the side or from a draught gauge onboard, if fitted, but the question of who does this is open to debate.
Page 81
A visual check from the pilot boat would be one solution, notwithstanding some pilots join their vessels by helicopter, but even then any movement or chop on the water would introduce an error that may not be acceptable. Another possible method to verify draught would be for the regulatory authority to do spot checks either at the arrival port or even from a vessel (AMSA emergency response vessel?) and come down hard on any master who mis-declared his draught. See Section 8.4.
11.6.5
Long Range Planning
The possibility does exist of a deep draught vessel arriving to transit the Strait and being too deep for transit, either as a result of having a greater draught than anticipated or the actual tidal height being less than predicted. In an extreme case this could result in the vessel being unable to transit and having to divert north of PNG or around Australia, or at the very least being delayed with all the associated costs. The system developers of the Long Range Planning option for UKC have made it very clear that the responsibility for deciding what percentage of the available additional draught is chosen lies squarely with the vessel operator thus placing the responsibility for ships arrival draught with the master/operator. In the case of actual tide height not reaching predicted height, this is factored into the dynamic UKC calculation based on historical data. It is not felt that this will be any more of a problem than it is currently and could in fact be less of a problem given the greater accuracy of input data that would be associated with a real time UKC system.
Page 82
12
12.1
RISK ASSESSMENT General
The risk assessment for the introduction and use of an Under Keel Clearance System has been conducted in accordance with the requirement of AS/NZS 4360:2004 Risk Management and related Guidelines. The process applied for the Risk Assessment is shown in the following schematic flow.
The main elements of the Risk Assessment process are described as follows: Communication and consultation. As part of the study for the implementation of a under keel clearance, TCS conducted a comprehensive program of consultation with key stakeholders in this project. The initial individual consultations was followed by a Risk Consultation Workshop that was held in Canberra to seek the input of stakeholders into the main elements of the risk management process relating to the possible relaxation of the current 12.2m draught restriction in the Torres Strait by the implementation of a real-time under keel clearance system. Context of the Risk Assessment. Further to the consultation process, TCS has established the context in which the risk management process takes place including external and internal factors and risk criteria against which risks have been assessed. The risk criteria are expressed in terms of likelihood, consequences and level of risks.
Risk identification. The consultation with key stakeholders and the establishment of the context of the risk assessment has enabled TCS to narrow the scope of the risk assessment to the operational models which have been identified as options for the operation and governance of a real-time under keel clearance system within the Torres Strait. The risks identified are of an operational and legal nature. Risk Analysis. The risks have been analysed against the established criteria of likelihood and consequences including the evaluation of existing controls. The result of this process was the ranking of risk as High, Medium or Low. Risk Evaluation. The estimated levels of risk were compared against the established criteria in order to evaluate negative outcomes versus potential benefits. Risk Treatment. The risks were ranked in order of severity and reviewed in order to identify and recommend risk treatments. The result of this process should assist AMSA to make decisions on which operational model to adopt for the operation and governance of an under keel clearance and manage any specific area where risks have been identified.
12.2
12.2.1
Risk Assessment process

Context of Risk Analysis for the introduction of a Under Keel Clearance System and related options for Operational Models
Thompson Clarke Shipping was commissioned by AMSA to undertake a study of Under Keel Clearance in the Torres Strait in relation to the possible introduction of a real-time Under Keel Clearance (UKC) system. Part of the scope of work was to: Undertake a risk assessment of the introduction of a UKC system in Torres Strait encompassing the full range of potential risk scenarios including policy, legal and operational aspects and recommend appropriate risk mitigation strategies. Although a Safety Risk Assessment was undertaken in 2004 by AMSA using the PAWSA model the subject of under keel clearance was not addressed specifically. As part of this report an analysis of the risks associated with under keel clearance has been made in relation to how they affect AMSA using the Australian Standard AS4360 Standard on Risk Management. The risk assessment process followed the AS4360 process with recommended Risk Treatments being put forward for each of the two Primary Options presented in this report. The major risk for AMSA is a vessel touching bottom or grounding whilst using a UKC system so the extent of the risk assessment is confined to System Output Data, Use of the System and Failure of the System all of which could result in a loss of under keel clearance. The risks therefore relate to the operational, legal and political fallout that would inevitably follow a grounding incident. Policy risks were discussed in Section 11 and are associated with the introduction of a UKC system.
12.2.2
Communication and consultation with stakeholders
As part of this overall risk assessment a Risk Consultation Workshop was held in Canberra with the following attendees invited as stakeholders in this project to seek their input into what they saw as the risks relating to the possible relaxation of the current 12.2m draught restriction in the Torres Strait by the implementation of a real-time under keel clearance system.
Page 84
Attendees: Bob Alchin Kushy Athureliya James Bond Allan Boath Gerry Brine Jillian Carson-Jackson Wal Cray Gary Duschler Mark Eldon-Roberts Tim Gourlay Mike Handfield Teresa Hatch Phil Hickey Tony Jordan Nick Lemon Phil Marsh Jim Martin Bill Mitchell Peter O'Brien Terry O'Brien Barbara Pearson Rob Power Garry Prosser Roger Rusling Mark Schwartz Craig Southerwood Neil Trainor Capt Robert Ward DOTARS Shipping Australia Limited AMSA MSQ Port of Weipa AMSA AMSA Australian Reef Pilots Port Hedland Port Authority AMSA Curtin University QAL ASA Caltex Australia AMSA AMSA Torres Pilots AMSA National Tidal Facility OMC International OMC International AMSA Australian Reef Pilots AMSA AMSA AMS. Australian Reef Pilots AMSA Australian Hydrographic Service, RAN
12.2.3
Results
It was found that the areas that indicated a high risk were associated with see Appendix D. UKC input data specifically chart soundings, tides, climate and weather and ship related data all of which have a measure of tolerance that requires better definition. Pollution and damage to the environment along with impacts on social and commercial infrastructure. Adverse publicity and media damage. Risk of vessel touching bottom from weather induced vessel movement i.e. rolling and pitching or surging. Regulatory investigations/enquiries leading to political fallout. This confirmed the information given by the group representatives during their presentations with by far the greatest emphasis being on the quality of input data for the UKC calculation, particularly the quality of the survey information making up the current and, shortly to be re-issued, navigational chart of the region. In fact the representative of the AHO made the point that, given the current survey tolerances of +/1.2m (ZOC Category A2), even the current 12.2m draught limit may be questionable.
Page 85
12.2.4
Workshop Summary
It should be stressed that the Risk Consultation Workshop was not a full Risk Assessment but an opportunity to get stakeholder input into the risks associated with the introduction of a real-time UKC system to the Torres Strait. The risks identified by the stakeholders at the workshop related mainly to the development and use of a real-time UKC system and the consequences of a grounding incident. The low and medium order risks are tolerable with the right risk management systems in place but it is evident from the high order risks that an improvement into the input data used for calculating real-time UKC needs to be achieved before any consideration is given to introducing a UKC system into Torres Strait.
12.2.5
Risk Criteria
Prior to the acquisition and implementation of a real-time UKC system for the Torres Strait AMSA would have to satisfy themselves that whatever operational model was chosen, a full Risk Assessment to their own risk management standard would have to be carried out. Based on the four possible operational models identified in this report a general risk assessment has been conducted to identify the main risks, likelihood of them occurring and the subsequent consequences as well as mitigation strategies to minimize the occurrence of such risks. Furthermore legal comment has been added that relates to AMSAs position for each operational model.
Consequences scale
Severity Level Consequences Types Economic Damage to the Maritime Industry Heath and Safety Single fatality and/or severe irreversible disability (+30%) to one or more persons Moderate irreversible disability or impairment (30%) to one or more persons Environment Very serious, long term environmental impairment of ecosystem functions Community/Govt/ Reputation/Media Serious public or media outcry (international coverage) Legal
Major
AUD 1M to AUD 10M
Major breach of regulation Major litigation Serious breach of regulation with investigation or report to authority with prosecution and/or moderate find possible Minor legal issues, noncompliances and breaches of regulation
Moderate
AUD 100,000 to AUD 1M
Serious medium term environmental effects
Significant adverse national media/public/NGO attention
Minor
AUD 10,000 to AUD 100,000
Objective but reversible disability requiring hospitalization
Moderate shortterm effects but not affecting ecosystem functions
Attention from media and/or heightened concern by local community. Criticism by NGOs
Page 86
Likelihood Scale
Level Likely Possible Unlikely Description The event may occur several times or more during the operations of the UKC system The event might occur once during the operations of the UKC system The event does occur somewhere from time to time during the operations of the UKC system Indicative Frequency (expected to occur) Once every three years Once every ten years Once every thirty years
12.2.6
Risk Matrix
Consequence
Mino Moderat Majo
Likel
Likelihood
Possibl
Unlikel Legen
Risk unacceptably high (action required ) Risk medium (tolerable but monitor) Risk low (Acceptable with review)
Page 87
12.3
Risk Identification, Analysis and Evaluation
The assumption for all scenarios is that AMSA provides and maintains any additional real- time ocean data collection infrastructure such as wave rider buoys, tidal gauges etc.
Primary Option 1 AMSA managed Real Time UKC system

Scenario: AMSA enters into a license agreement with a real-time UKC provider and puts the operational/monitoring function of the system in the hands of an organization such as REEFCENTRE. Charges would probably be an additional levy on existing navigation charges.
Risk What can happen? (Event) How can it happen? What can happen? (Consequences) Identify existing controls Likelihood Analysis
ConLevel of sequences Risk
Operational Risks Incorrect data output from the UKC system Incorrect data is provided for input in the UKC system Inadequate or incorrect metocean data Inaccurate V/L draughts, squat. Potential touch bottom incident or grounding Delays to commercial traffic in the Torres Strait Safety Audit provisions under MO 54 Acceptance regime Unlikely Major Medium
Poor quality survey info Incorrect use of the UKC system Incorrect interpretation and/or communicatio n of UKC output data to the users of the system Incorrect interpretation of UKC data by the users of the system Failure of the UKC system AMSA licensed UKC system breakdown UKC Operator error in scheduling vessel transit UKC User error in planning the loading and transit of the vessel Potential touch bottom incident or grounding. Potential delays due to congestion or transit conflicts. Potential delays due to insufficient water depth to allow transit. On shore support by trained REEFCENT RE Operators Unlikely Major Medium
Met-ocean data network unavailable/com munication problems
Potential touch bottom incident or grounding. Delays to commercial traffic in the Torres Strait. AMSA will need to reverse to static system
12.2 metre static system
Possible
Moderate
Medium
Page 88
Primary Option2 Private system

Scenario: AMSA merely endorses one or more systems that provide the ability to achieve greater draught by virtue of the use of a real-time UKC system. The pilotage providers would choose (or not) to use such systems and make a charge based on additional draught achieved above the 12.2 metre current restriction. .
Risk What can happen? (Event) How can it happen? What can happen? (Consequences) Identify existing controls Likelihoo d Analysis
ConLevel of sequences Risk
Operational Risks Incorrect data output from the UKC system Incorrect data is provided for input in the AMSA Acceptance Regime Inadequate or incorrect metocean data Inaccurate V/L draughts, squat. Potential touch bottom incident or grounding. Delays to commercial traffic in the Torres Strait Safety Audit provisions under MO 54 Acceptance Regime Unlikely Major Medium
Poor quality survey info Incorrect use of the UKC system Incorrect interpretation and/or commedication of UKC output data to the users of the system by the pilotage providers Incorrect interpretation of UKC data by the users of the system \UKC Operator error in scheduling vessel transit UKC User error in planning the loading and transit of the vessel Potential touch bottom incident or grounding. Potential delays due to congestion or transit conflicts. Potential delays due to insufficient water depth for transit. Licensed Pilots On shore support Safety Audit provisions under MO 54 Unlikely Major Medium
Failure of the UKC system
AMSA Acceptance Regime UKC system breakdown
Met-ocean data collection network unavailable
Delays to commercial traffic in the Torres Strait due to reversion to static system
12.2 metre static system
Possible
Minor
Low
See Section 13 regarding legal liability
Page 89
12.4
Risk Treatments
Risk Treatments Summary Recommended Treatment Options Residual Risk Low
Risk (in order of severity)
Primary Option 1 AMSA controlled real-time UKC system Incorrect data output from the real-time UKC system (Medium) Incorrect use of the real-time UKC system (Medium) Identify and improve the process of collection, validation and communication of data required for input in the real-time UKC system Develop a robust internal and external periodic verification process of the operations of REEFCENTRE and the pilots specific to the control and use of the real-time UKC system Development of plans of cooperation with the pilotage providers on the use of the real-time UKC system Improve the provision and quality of AtoNs Failure of the real-time UKC system (Medium) Develop and implement system back-up procedures Low
Low
Primary Option 2 Private real-time UKC system Incorrect data output from the real-time UKC system (Medium) Incorrect use of the real-time UKC system (Medium) Acceptance Regime System audit Make provisions in the licensing of Torres Strait pilot for initial training, examination and periodic refreshment training in the use of real-time UKC system Continual monitoring and auditing. Failure of the real-time UKC system (Low) Acceptance Regime to cover system back up Establish the function of on shore pilot to support on board pilot in case of system failure Low Low Low
See Section 13 regarding legal liability On the basis that the mitigations for each operational model are achieved the residual risks should be considered low as the accuracy of the output data and the integrity of the system used by trained professionals would ensure optimum performance. Compulsory pilotage as now exists ensures that a trained and experienced professionals with the requisite local knowledge would be responsible for guiding the ship through the Torres Strait using the output data from a UKC system.
Page 90
13
COMMON LAW LIABILITY OF AMSA TO SHIP OWNERS
In part 11 of this Report, two UKC operational models and governance options are examined. They broadly divide into operational systems where AMSA controls the system and where AMSA provides an approval (DOC) to a pilotage service provider that intends to use a privately operated UKC system. A full consideration of both operational systems requires a review of the legal liability that may attach to control and/or audit responsibilities in the event of a grounding that was found to have been caused by the use of UKC technology In Graham Barclay Oysters Pty Ltd v Ryan [2002] HCA 54 Gummow and Hayne JJ said: An evaluation of whether a relationship between a statutory authority and a class of persons imports a common law duty of care is necessarily a multi-faceted inquiry. Each of the salient features of the relationship must be considered. The focus of analysis is the relevant legislation and the positions occupied by the parties on the facts as found at trial (Pyrenees Shire Council v Day (1998) 192 CLR 330 at 377) It ordinarily will be necessary to consider the degree and nature of control exercised by the authority over the risk of harm that eventuated (Howard v Jarvis (1958) 98 CLR 177 at 183; Burnie Port Authority v General Jones Pty Ltd (1994) 179 CLR 520 at 550-552); the degree of vulnerability of those who depend on the proper exercise by the authority of its powers (Burnie Port Authority v General Jones Pty Ltd (1994) 179 CLR 520 at 551; Crimmins v Stevedoring Industry Finance Committee (1999) 200 CLR 1 at 24-25, 38-39, 40-41); and the consistency or otherwise of the asserted duty of care with the terms, scope and purpose of the relevant statute (Sullivan v Moody (2001) 75 ALJR 1570 at 1580-1581). In particular categories of cases, some features will be of increased significance. Looking at an AMSA controlled UKC model in the light of the test proposed by the High Court; AMSA would be exercising a high degree of control over the risk of harm. This arises because if AMSA are controlling a UKC system, they will be managing data inputs and outputs and conducting the scheduling of vessels themselves. Secondly, there would be a significant degree of vulnerability to ship owners by steaming through Torres Strait at a draught that produces a reduced UKC that was determined by AMSA. Thirdly, given that the intention of MO54 includes determining the manner in which pilots carry out their pilotage duties in Torres Strait, it is certainly possible to argue that the existence of a duty of care is not inconsistent with the regulatory framework created by the Navigation Act 1912 and MO54. Under this test, a duty of care is likely to exist in an AMSA controlled model. Nevertheless, if AMSA controls a UKC operation, a duty of care is still likely to exist but it provides an opportunity for AMSA to obtain a much better understanding of the inherent risks associated with the real-time UKC software system given the direct relationship with the software vendor. A greater understanding of the technology enables AMSA to structure a more defined liability regime, either by contract and/or amendments to MO54, involving AMSA, the software vendor, and the pilots. Under the alternative position where AMSA are issuing a DOC to a pilotage service provider and simply undertaking the audits required in MO54, the liability position would appear to be significantly reduced because there would no longer be the management control that is extant in an AMSA controlled system. Under this model, any residual liability arises by reason of AMSA issuing a DOC that would include the privately operated UKC system and/or by conducting audits that embrace the UKC system in accordance with MO54. To address the consequential liability position it is important to know what will be disclosed to AMSA and therefore what would AMSA be 'approving' under MO54? This is far from clear at the moment. It therefore seems to us impracticable to make definitive observations on the existence of a duty of care until such time as the nature of the information that will be disclosed has been clarified.
Page 91
The problem is that AMSA can expect to have a much more restricted visibility of the softwares operation under this model which in turn produces a greatly reduced understanding of the inherent software risks. As clearly stated by the software vendors, the issue of commercial IP will ensure there will always be details relating to the operation of real-time UKC software that will never be disclosed to AMSA or any other party irrespective of confidentiality agreements. As reported by software vendors during the consultation, this implies that there will always be an associated liability accepted by the UKC software vendor for the operation of the software algorithms. The extent of this liability needs to be defined and it is apparent that determining this issue can literally take years. As noted during the consultation, the Port of Melbourne Corporation (POMC) is currently in the process of trialling the OMC DUKC product. Originating as a result of OMCs involvement in one of the consortiums associated with a Port Phillip dredging EOI, the POMC has to date spent many years in assessing the risks, liabilities and surrounding issues associated with the use of a real-time UKC software system in relation to POMCs safety role within the Port. TCS understands that this investigation also involved engagement of Monash University to assist in a detailed assessment of the risks from a statistical perspective all of which was on the basis of a formal confidentiality agreement. As a result, it is fair to conclude that the issues surrounding risk and liability in relation to UKC are potentially very complex, and are likely to involve an extensive investigation over a substantial period of time to ensure all relevant issues are understood. The question as to whether or not AMSA would be under a duty of care to ship owners and or others in either or both of these operational systems is a matter that should be referred to AMSA's legal advisors for review and advice on the associated liability exposure. This is particularly important given the recent approach of the High Court of Australia in adopting an "incremental approach" to determining the existence of a duty of care.16 As McHugh J said in Crimmins v Stevedoring Industry Finance Committee (1999) 74 ALJR 1 "The policy of developing novel cases incrementally by reference to analogous cases acknowledges that there is no general test for determining whether a duty of care exists." As noted above, this is best done only when adequate information is to hand about the nature of the data that will or wont be disclosed to AMSA. Refer also to Appendix E Legal Issues Summary
16
See generally CCH Torts Reporter 1-780
Page 92
14
14.1
BROAD BASED COST ESTIMATES General
The costing providing in this section is based on broad based estimates only. As has become significantly evident to TCS throughout the consultancy, if the governance approach adopted is than of an AMSA managed operation, there is a need for detailed involvement by AMSA with a nominated real-time UKC provider prior to enable determination of definitive costs and associated alternates. Actual costs will be influenced by the potential cost/risk tradeoffs that can only be assessed by the real-time UKC software system provider (based on the IP of the algorithms known only to the provider) following an initial desktop study for which the provider would be responsible. The desktop study is likely to involve at least the following key considerations: review relevant technical literature on local area characteristics, including past environmental studies, and identify specific implications given the algorithms and operation of the software providers system; acquire historical environmental measurements for climate analysis and environmental modelling where available; acquire bathymetric data from the region for the purposes of analysing bathymetry and morphology where available; conduct environmental modelling and validation of that modelling (which may require temporary deployment of measuring instruments at a number of locations); identify specific implications of the chart based soundings on software operation, and address issues/alternatives to AMSA as required (including cost/benefit implications); identify specific implications of options associated with differing real-time met-ocean data collection alternatives on software operation, and address issues/alternatives to AMSA as required (including cost/benefit implications); construct a number of prototype UKC models based on the identified technical alternatives (it may not be possible to implement all technical alternatives exactly as they may rely on data feeds that have not been established some approximation may be necessary); In assessing the validation requirements, the following tasks would be included: identify the need for ship simulations involving pilots and third party consultants using a system such as Simflex (i.e. assess the horizontal navigation implications of moving to the new UKC regime); identify validation measurements that would most complement the existing body of validation of the applied modeling methods; and prioritize areas of customer concern (for example, the customer may be concerned more about squat due to high currents rather than wave response; in that case, validation may be targeted towards the area of concern).
14.2
Hydrographic Surveying
Based on information supplied by the Australian Hydrographic Office the broad cost of re-surveying the Prince of Wales Channel and the Brothers Patches (the areas that are currently only surveyed to ZOC A2 standard) would be in the region of $300,000 to $350,000. This is based on surveying only the width of the two way channel using a survey vessel capable of scanning the seabed to a beam width of 150 metres with each sweep. The total distance the vessel would have to travel would be about 335 miles which, at four knots would require about 83 hours of surveying. Assuming 10% additional time for contingencies approximately 90 hours or about 11 x 8 hour days would be required at $30,000 per day.
Page 93
14.3
Met-Ocean Data Monitoring System and Network
As identified earlier in the report, irrespective of whether an AMSA managed operation or a private sector managed operation was adopted for a Torres Strait real-time UKC regime, it is anticipated that the ownership and operation of a real-time met-ocean data monitoring system and network is likely to be an AMSA responsibility. For the purpose of a broad estimate, a priced submission (providing approximate pricing only) on provision of RETWAC and Current Meter Buoys were sought from MetOcean Engineers, particularly given their familiarity with Australian waterways, and their prior involvement with both OMC and VMS (as ARP). The broad based pricing estimates (with key unit pricing) is provided below (all costs in Australian dollars, and exclusive of GST): RETWAC SYSTEM EQUIPMENT
Item Oceanographic Sensor
Model or Description Waves, Currents and Tide sensor with 50m underwater cable, underwater connectors and splices. Seabed frame, Dan forth anchors, 13mm galvanized chain and mooring hardware, lead weights, anodes and sand spikes. Two (2) 1 watt Spread Spectrum Radio Modems, including housings, directional antennas, RF coax and connectors Solar panel, regulator, galvanized panel mounts, dual 44Ahr sealed lead acid batteries and cabling. Sealed lockable S/Steel Enclosure, mountings, frames and pile clamps (4 off). Designed to suit Navigation Pile Factory setup, calibration and full system test with documentation Pentium PC with standard fittings as required including PCAnywhere, dial up modem and multiport serial card. For RETWAC System. Total for RETWAC System Equipment:
Price $ 75,000
Seabed Hardware
5,500
Data Telemetry Link
7,000
Solar Power Supply
3,200
Enclosures and mountings
5,300
System Integration and Test Processing, display, archiving PC User Manuals
4,000 4,000
770 104,770
Page 94
SOFTWARE SUPPLY
Item Leased Software Software support
Model or Description Software supply and configuration. Software leased, and includes software support for RETWAC. Cost per month for a 3 year agreement term.
Price $ 9,000 950/mth
Alternative to Lease - Software Purchase
POA
RETWAC SYSTEM INSTALLATION
Item MetOcean Engineer (office preparation) MetOcean Engineer (field) MetOcean Technician (field) Diving preparation
Description 2 days @ $900 per day 7 days @ $1,200 per day 7 days @ $1,200 per day Preparation of procedures, mob/demob. 800 Dive team Provision of 3 man dive team ($190/hour, min 8 hours Mon Fri). Equipment and vessel provision (per day) Vessel and diving consumables 2 fares 6 nights (for 2) Allow 1,000 Total for Installation and Commissioning:
Price $ 1,800 8,400 8,400 1,520
Diving equipment & vessel Diving consumables Airfares Accommodation Sundries
1,300 150 3,000 1,600 1,000 27,970
METEOROLOGICAL SENSORS (For inclusion with the RETWAC)
Item Meteorological data logger Wind sensor Barometric pressure sensor Air temperature sensor
Model or Description MC-7000 Windsonic ultrasonic wind sensor, mounting bracket and cable. PTB-100A barometric pressure sensor, venting tube and mini static pressure port. 4 wire RTD air temperature sensor mounted in naturally ventilated radiation shield, mounting
Price $ 4,250 3,100 1,295 400
Page 95
Item
Model or Description bracket and cable.
Price $
Relative humidity sensor
MP101A relative humidity sensor mounted in naturally ventilated radiation shield, mounting bracket and cable. SP440 solar radiation sensor, mounting bracket and cable. Factory setup, calibration and full system test with documentation. Configured for the selected sensors
1,520
Solar radiation sensor System Integration and Test Meteorological software module
675 2,700 POA
CURRENT METER BUOY SYSTEM EQUIPMENT
Item Sensor Buoy Buoy Hardware
Model or Description Aquadopp current meter with symmetrical head. Meridian plus model buoy with self contained navigation light. Associated equipment including cabling, connectors, custom hatch, cable runners, equipment bracketing, antenna, internal ballast weight, buoy cradle, etc. Two (2) 1 watt Spread Spectrum Radio Modems, including housings, antennas, RF coax and connectors Solar panels, regulator, mountings, sealed lead acid batteries and cabling. Surface tether, flotation, anchor weights (standard) and hardware. Factory setup, calibration and full system test with documentation Pentium PC with standard fittings as required including PCAnywhere, dial up modem and multiport serial card. For complete system. Total for Current Meter Buoy System Equipment:
Price $ 16,800 4,250 15,500
Data Telemetry Link
7,000
Solar Power Supply Buoy Mooring System Integration and Test Processing, display, archiving PC User Manuals
1,900 8,000 4,000 4,000
770 62,220
Page 96
CURRENT METER BUOY SYSTEM SOFTWARE SUPPLY
Item Software Software support
Model or Description Software supply and configuration. Software leased, and includes software support for RETWAC. Cost per month for a 3 year agreement term.
Price $ 7,950 POA
CURRENT METER BUOY SYSTEM INSTALLATION
Item MetOcean Engineer (office preparation) MetOcean Engineer (field) Airfares Accommodation Sundries
Description 2 days @ $900 per day 5 days @ $1,200 per day 1 fare 4 nights Allow 300 Total for Installation and Commissioning:
Price $ 1,800 6,000 1,500 800 300 10,400
On an assumption that the requirement for met-ocean data collection devices is no more than two RETWACs complete with ACDP, AST and tide gauges (in addition met-ocean data derived from existing met-ocean devices in the region) and two current buoys, the following broad based estimate is provided:
CAPITAL COSTS (APPROX SUPPLY & INSTALL) ACDP, AST & Tide Gauges RETWAC 1: RETWAC 2: Current Buoy 1: Current Buoy 2: Dedicated communications and network infrastructure (ie beyond available carrier services) TOTAL CAPITAL COST ESTIMATE: Operational Costs (Approx $ per annum) Inclusive of all the above subsystems(O&M activities including communications services costs, etc) $150,000 $150,000 MET Devices $20,000 $20,000 Total $170,000 $170,000 $80,000 $80,000 $100,000
$600,000
$150,000
Page 97
Other key assumptions in the above pricing include: No major civil/structural works have been included in the above, therefore it is assumed that existing structures exist at appropriate locations Broad estimates of per annum costs are included for communications services and related telemetry associated with the transmission of met-ocean data from the install sites to a regional real-time UKC processing system (eg Thursday Island). Actual costs will be significantly dependant on system selected, and the basis by which the met-ocean data is disseminated (if at all) direct to vessels. The cost benefits of including maintenance within existing Navaid maintenance service contracts for the region has not been included (i.e. providing a potential operational cost reduction). The operational costs include allowances for regular calibration of instrumentation, as well as support for other basic QA activities to ensure reliable system operation.
14.4
14.4.1
Real-Time UKC System (S/Ware and H/Ware)

AMSA Managed Operation
During the period of this study, only very limited and indicative information was able to be obtained by TCS for capital works and on-going operational costs to establish and support a real-time UKC system (hardware and software). In the absence of pricing information by vendors, and only for the purpose of this study, a broad capital cost estimate by TCS for the procurement and complete establishment of a real-time UKC system (independent of the met-ocean data monitoring system and network) was concluded to be between $1.5 and $2.0 million Australian. This cost estimate is anticipated to include all costs associated with the planning and implementation, such as: All required shore based processing systems (hardware and software) and monitoring workstations (including systems within the Torres Strait region plus monitoring systems at REEFREP if applicable) All preliminary works required by the vendor as identified and listed in Section 14.1 of this report, such as development, deployment and analyses of temporary tidal/current instruments for data collection configuration (and all modelling as applicable) Any software development required to the existing software platform to ensure full compliance with operational needs and requirements All tailoring/configuration and commissioning of vendors software/hardware system to meet the specific and unique requirements of the waterway, and client Full scale validation including the practical field trials and performance proofing All required education, formal training, and documentation requirements for all stakeholders All vendor specific environmental data QA software systems to ensure integrity and robustness of real-time met-ocean data for UKC determination This broad based price estimate does not include the provision of laptops for pilot PPUs (assumed to be procured by the pilot organizations), and does not include costs for additional hydrographic surveying that may be required (but it does include the complete analysis of existing data, and clarity on implications as part of the cost/benefit trade off determination that will be undertaken in the vendors initial desk top analysis). The pricing above assumes operation of the real-time UKC software under license from the vendor, with full software support provided by the vendor (i.e. not software procurement). As a result, a key
Page 98
component of the operational costs will be a license fee, as well as physical support costs and related maintenance services. TCS estimates an ongoing license, support and maintenance cost for the realtime UKC software of approximately $1 million per annum. As with any technology project of this nature, these costs are budgetary only, and are anticipated to be refined through the detailed requirements determination process within the initial planning phase of the implementation. It is anticipated that AMSA would recoup at least a portion of the costs of establishment and operation through an increase in navigation levies.
14.4.2
Other AMSA Costs and Operational Variants
The most cost effective implementation of an AMSA managed operation is anticipated to be through augmenting the REEFREP service, particularly given that the existing operational facilities and support services available through REEFREP would form an additional cost if a separate and dedicated operation or facility was established (This holds true irrespective of whether the dedicated service was based on an AMSA operational division, or as an outsourced service on a fee for service or lump sum service procurement based on an amortization of service costs). The inclusion of the operation within REEFREP (as an augmentation of the existing service) is anticipated to result in a minimal marginal cost only. Given the requirement for 24/7 operations the establishment of a dedicated operation would increase the annual operationing costs significantly. As with any 24/7 operation, the most significant additional cost would be that of staffing. Even as a single seat operation, the annual operationing costs will increase by approximately $600,000 on operational staff alone, prior to the inclusion of managerial overheads (based on six staff required for one operational 24/7 seat, with a total employment cost estimate per staff of $100,000 per annum inclusive of loadings).
14.4.3
Private Sector Managed Operation
In general, the order of magnitude costs identified for the AMSA managed operation above will also be applicable to any one single private sector managed operator of a real-time UKC system. In relation to the pilot provided UKC service regime advocated by VMS, it could be argued that the overall total cost of implementing such a regime would be closer to double the cost that would be incurred in an AMSA managed Common User System operation. This is based on the fact that both ARP and Torres Strait Pilots would need to own and operate a real-time UKC system, and the cost to each is likely to be similar to that applied to AMSA in the AMSA managed operation irrespective of the fact that each pilotage organization would be servicing approximately half the number of vessels each (i.e. licensing and support costs are unlikely to be proportioned based on lesser vessel application). Irrespective of the method of direct cost recovery in each of the possible governance models, economic principles dictate that the higher cost of the private sector regime overall will ultimately be passed on to the broader maritime industry (i.e. a higher cost to the maritime industry overall). In addition, it is likely that the operational staffing of a 24/7 (or close to 24/7) shore based real-time UKC pilot support facility (as indicated by VMS) is an additional cost that would be avoided in the AMSA managed operation through the utilization of existing 24/7 REEFREP operators and facility at marginal costs only.
Page 99
14.5
Overall Cost Summary
The following table is an attempt to accumulate the key cost drivers associated with the different consideration variants, with identification of a capital and recurrent broad cost estimate where possible: All costs are broad based estimates by TCS based on available information and our understanding of requirements derived through the course of this study:
Consideration Variants
Capital Cost
Annual Recurrent
Procurement Options Greenfield Development $5million+ Unlikely for a UKC of the required sophistication $1.0 to $2.0m $1.0m $2m+ (Includes ongoing development support)
Buy License (based on broad estimates from OMC) Real-Time Met-Ocean Data Network Options: AMSA owned and operated (increment existing NAVAID contracts) Private Sector owned and operated Method of Operation and Staffing: New dedicated service provider
$600k $800k+
$150k $300k+
Very high cost Minimal cost actual value depends on the nature of the existing service
Very high cost Minimal cost actual value depends on the nature of the existing service
Augmentation of existing service
Based on the above, the following table is an attempt to identify broad based cost estimates for costs to be incurred by AMSA in the most viable implementation options:
Consideration Variants for Viable Implementation Options
Single AMSA Managed Service (Primary Option 1) Capital Cost Annual Recurrent $1.15m
One or More Multiple Private Sector Managed Services (Primary Option 2) Capital Cost $0.6m Annual Recurrent $0.15m
AMSA Owned and Operated real-time met-ocean data network Private Sector Owned and Operated realtime met-ocean data network
$2.6m
$2.8m+
$1.3m+
$0
$0
Page 100
The following clarifications and assumptions are relevant to BOTH cost tables above: The costing above is NOT intended to be complete for provision budgeting, and is based only on costs that can be estimated without significant further investigation. Budgetary cost estimating will require more extensive industry consultation, and concept design development. Clarification of budgetary pricing for the real-time meto-ocean network options requires the development of a concept design, particularly in relation to the dissemination network and need for met-ocean data to be provided direct to PPU. This will be dependant on the architecture of the selected real-time UKC system (i.e. OMC or ARP). The private sector option for the real-time met-ocean network is based on implementation by an existing complementary service in the region (i.e. minimum cost implementation) but with the inclusion of a profit margin beyond the pricing for an AMSA implemented option. The costs associated with method of operation and staffing and are not able to be derived without reference to a specific site and existing service (in the augmentation option), therefore not included in the final summary table. In relation to the REEFREP option, the capital and ongoing costs are anticipated to be very minimal on an assumption of no additional operator seat requirement. All other infrastructure and tools required for a UKC service is already included in REEFREP (i.e. the radio communications services, radar, etc). As identified elsewhere in this report, the inclusion of only one operational 24/7 seat alone will cost approximately $600k in labour costs (assuming six staff per seat).
Page 101
APPENDIX A
AHO Controlling Depth Accuracies
Thompson Clarke Shipping
Appendices
APPENDIX B
Recorded Tidal Residuals for the Torres Strait Region
Appendices
APPENDIX C
Data on Torres Straits Transits
Appendices
APPENDIX D
Risk Consultation Workshop List of Risks
Appendices
APPENDIX E
Legal Issues Summary
Appendices

Ukc Final Tcs Report

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Deskripsi Asli:

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Ukc Final Tcs Report

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Assistance with the Implementation of an Under Keel Clearance System For Torres Strait

Implementation of an Under Keel Clearance System for the Torres Strait

Australian Maritime Safety Authority

Thompson Clarke Shipping Pty Ltd

Implementation of an Under Keel Clearance System for the Torres Strait

Thompson Clarke Shipping Pty Ltd

Implementation of an Under Keel Clearance System for the Torres Strait

Thompson Clarke Shipping Pty Ltd

Implementation of an Under Keel Clearance System for the Torres Strait

Potential Benefits of a Real-Time UKC System in Torres Strait

UKC Systems Under Consideration

UKC System Inputs

Thompson Clarke Shipping Pty Ltd

Implementation of an Under Keel Clearance System for the Torres Strait

Thompson Clarke Shipping Pty Ltd

Implementation of an Under Keel Clearance System for the Torres Strait

Thompson Clarke Shipping Pty Ltd

Implementation of an Under Keel Clearance System for the Torres Strait

Thompson Clarke Shipping Pty Ltd

Implementation of an Under Keel Clearance System for the Torres Strait

Thompson Clarke Shipping Pty Ltd

Implementation of an Under Keel Clearance System for the Torres Strait

Provided by OMC during the consultancy

Implementation of an Under Keel Clearance System for the Torres Strait

The Real-Time or Predictive UKC Concept

Risk and Safety Implications

Thompson Clarke Shipping Pty Ltd

Implementation of an Under Keel Clearance System for the Torres Strait

THE USE OF REAL TIME UKC SYSTEMS AND REGIMES General

Australia / New Zealand Operational Experience

Thompson Clarke Shipping Pty Ltd

Implementation of an Under Keel Clearance System for the Torres Strait

Overseas Operational Experience

Thompson Clarke Shipping Pty Ltd

Implementation of an Under Keel Clearance System for the Torres Strait

Cape Canaveral, Florida and Kings Bay, Georgia, US

PORTS Physical Oceanographic System, US

Implementation of an Under Keel Clearance System for the Torres Strait

Port of Rotterdam, Netherlands

Implementation of an Under Keel Clearance System for the Torres Strait

MarNIS Maritime Navigation and Information Services

Hymedis Vlaamse Banken and Zege

Thompson Clarke Shipping Pty Ltd

Implementation of an Under Keel Clearance System for the Torres Strait

REAL-TIME UKC SOFTWARE APPLICATIONS AND VENDORS General

Implementation of an Under Keel Clearance System for the Torres Strait

Accuracy and Safety

Thompson Clarke Shipping Pty Ltd

Implementation of an Under Keel Clearance System for the Torres Strait

Applicability to the Torres Strait Region

A Potential UKC Operational Scenario

Thompson Clarke Shipping Pty Ltd

Implementation of an Under Keel Clearance System for the Torres Strait

Supporting Real Time Data Collection Devices

Port of Melbourne Voyage and OMC DUKC PPU Demonstration

Thompson Clarke Shipping Pty Ltd

Implementation of an Under Keel Clearance System for the Torres Strait

Thompson Clarke Shipping Pty Ltd

Implementation of an Under Keel Clearance System for the Torres Strait

Voyage Management Systems (VMS)

Thompson Clarke Shipping Pty Ltd

Implementation of an Under Keel Clearance System for the Torres Strait

Accuracy and Safety