Radar equipment requirements and training standards - Introduction.

1. Introduction.
The basic legal acts regulating the use of radar equipment on ships (including devices with automatic echo tracking) focus on both
proper training of navigators and technical requirements.
Technical requirements for radar equipment are contained in IMO Resolutions (depending on the date of radar equipment installation
on the ship) and SOLAS Convention (Chapter V).
The most recent update of the regulations is in Resolution MSC.192(79), which was adopted on December 6, 2004, and entered into
force on July 1, 2008.
The last amendments to the SOLAS Convention were made in 2010.
The figure below shows the periods of Resolutions implementation issued by the IMO from the moment of their approval.

2. Legal acts containing technical requirements.

• SOLAS Convention and 2010 amendments - the newest version still includes radar equipment requirements for EPA, ATA oraz
ARPA.
• IMO Resolution A.422(XI) of 15.11.1979: Performance Standards for Automatic Radar Plotting Aids (ARPA) - contains
technical and functional requirements for devices installed on ships before 01.01.1997.
• IMO Resolution A.823(19) of 23.11.1995: Performance Standards for Automatic Radar Plotting Aids (ARPAs) - contains
technical and functional requirements for devices installed on ships after 01.01.1997.
• MSC.192(79) Resolution of 06.12.2004: Adoption of The Revised Performance Standards for Radar Equipment - contains
technical and functional requirements for devices installed on ships after 01.07.2008.
 • Appendix E to 872 IEC Recommendation - contains the recommended symbology for equipment installed on ships after
01.01.1997.
• Recommendations for the used symbols included in Guidelines for the presentation of navigational-related symbols, terms and
abbreviations (SN/Circ.243) with subsequent extensions and changes in 2008 and 2013 (Circular SN.1/Circ.243/Rev.1 z 23 maja
2014).

3. Standards of training in the radar devices operations.

Requirements for the training of navigators operating radar devices were demanding from the very beginning of training centers.
As one of the first courses, they had to be carried out with the use of appropriately equipped simulators, enabling not only the presentation
of their capabilities and functions, but also (and perhaps above all) errors and limitations of radar devices. Additional requirements for
the capabilities of the simulators used during the training increased over time in line with the integration of the navigation equipment
available on the bridge.
Training recommendations / requirements can be found in the following documents:
• STCW Convention - contains recommendations related to the organization of the training, its program, and requirements for
training centers.
• Rezolucja IMO A.482(XII) Training in the use of Automatic Radar Plotting Aids (ARPA) - concerns training in the use of
ARPA.
• IMO model courses:
o 1.07 - Radar Navigation, Radar Plotting and Use of ARPA – Radar Navigation at Operational Level;
o 1.08 - Radar, ARPA, Bridge Teamwork and Search and Rescue – Radar Navigation at Management Level;
contain proposals for the implementation of specialist courses in the use of radar equipment at an operational and management levels.
4. Resolution MSC.192(79) - Introduction.
At the beginning MSC recalling Article 28(b) of the Convention on the IMO concerning the functions of the Committee.
MSC also recalling Resolution A.886(21) by which the Assembly resolved that the functions of adopting performance standards and
technical specifications, as well as amendments thereto, shall be performed by the MSC on behalf of the Organization.
It is also important that older resolutions A.222(VII), A.278(VIII), A.477(XII), MSC.64(67), annex 4, A.820(19) and
A.823(19) containing performance standards applicable to marine radars being produced and installed at different time periods in
the past and that marine radars are used in connection/integration with other navigational equipment required to carry on board ships
such as, an automatic target tracking aid, ARPA, AIS, ECDIS and others.
There is the need for unification of maritime radar standards for display and presentation of navigation-related information.
HAVING CONSIDERED the recommendation on the revised performance standards for radar equipment made by the Sub-Committee
on Safety of Navigation at its fiftieth session,
MSC recommends Governments to ensure that radar equipment installed on or after 1 July 2008 conform to performance standards
not inferior to those set out in the Annex to the MSC.192(79) Resolution.

5. Resolution MSC.192(79) - scope of radar equipment.

In accordance with the requirements of the Resolution, the basic functions of the radar devices mounted on the bridge remain unchanged.
They are primarily intended to assist in:
o safe navigation;
o avoiding collisions.
The devices assist navigators by providing data (related to their own vessel) about the position of other vessels, obstructions and hazards,
navigation objects and the shorelines.
The radar should also provide possibility of integration and display simultaneously:
o radar image;
 o target tracking information;
o position data based on own vessel's position;
o geo referenced data.
To complement the radar data, it should be possible to connect and display AIS information on the screen.
However, in order to assist with navigation and control the ship's position, it may be possible to display a selected part of the information
of the Electronic Navigation Chart (ENC) and other vector maps.
The radar, combined with other sensor or reported information (e.g., AIS), should improve the safety of navigation by assisting in the
efficient navigation of ships and protection of the environment by satisfying the following functional requirements:
o clearly indicating land and other fixed hazards during coastal navigation and port approach;
o providing enhanced traffic information by ensuring that appropriate alarms and warnings are generated;
o as an anti-collision aid in the event of passing ships through detection and proper notification of distress and the possibility
of detecting small floating and fixed objects;
o enabling the detection of fixed and floating aids to navigation (AtN).

6. Resolution MSC.192(79) - standards application.

These Performance Standards should apply to all shipborne radar installations, used in any configuration, mandated by the 1974 SOLAS
Convention, as amended, independent of the:
o type of ship;
o frequency band in use; and
o type of display,
providing that no special requirements (specified in Table below) and that additional requirements for specific classes of ships (in
accordance with SOLAS chapters V and X) are met.
Close interaction between different navigational equipment and systems, makes it essential to consider these standards in
association with other relevant IMO standards.
Differences in the performance requirements for various sizes/categories of ship/craft to which SOLAS applies.

Source: Resolution MSC.192(79).

ARPA output information (vectors, alarms, and warnings, used symbols, past position, and history).
The basic types of information in ARPA.
The information presented on the ARPA screen can be divided into three following groups:
o graphic - additional information displayed on the radar screen as a supplement of the radar image, mainly presenting the
results of calculations carried out in the post-processing block.
o alphanumeric - available on additional alphanumeric displays or separate fields of the monitor screen.
o acoustic - as a supplement to graphic and alphanumeric information.

Graphic information.
The requirements of Resolution MSC.192 (79) contain those that refer to the graphical information that is mandatory in radars with
automatic object tracking.
It is about a certain set of symbols and markers that can be displayed on the radar screen for the acquired targets.
The obligatory set of graphic information includes:
o vectors (True vectors, Relative vectors);
o symbols (ARPA symbols);
o history of movements (History, Past Positions) and artificial glow (Trails, Afterglow).

In addition, individual manufacturers offer interesting (not required by the IMO Resolution) functions of presenting tracked target
information. If they are properly used, can improve its readability, make easy the situation assessment and speed up the decision-making
process.
Keep in mind that such functions have both advantages and disadvantages. One of them may be "obscuring" the situation presented on
the radar screen in the case when additional graphics is generated on it for a large number of tracked targets. In such a case, it is necessary
to consider whether such additional presentation is beneficial, or rather to give it up and use the traditional form of presentation, which
vectors are.
Such additional forms of graphical presentation of information include the following functions:
o PPC (Potential Point of Collision);
o PAD (Predicted Area of Danger);
o SOD (Sector of Danger).

Vector presentation (1).

Vector presentation is the traditional graphic form, which was easily transferred from radar plottings.
Of course, there are some important differences, including how they should be interpreted. While drawing plottings, the velocity vector
triangle was drawn with the use of the before recorded targets' positions, but when the vectors are presented on the ARPA screen, they
indicate the expected movement of tracked targets in the future (assuming, of course, that the ships will not perform any maneuvers). In
the case of the true vector presentation, it will of course be the true way of targets and own ship, while in the case of relative vectors -
their relative way.
The vector length is proportional to the ship's speed and depends on the Vector time parameter. It is only one parameter, the value of
which is set simultaneously for all displayed vectors.
Smooth adjustment of this parameter allows to follow the development of the situation and identify dangerous objects, even if they are
not yet marked with a dangerous target symbol (a triangle shape) and it is when the TCPA value is longer than the TCPALIMIT value.
Vector presentation (2).
In the case of true vectors, a dangerous situation will arise when, for a given length of vectors, the ends of the objects' vectors will be
near the end of the Own Ship (OS) true vector. Such a situation is presented in the figures below.
If the vector lengths are too short, then it is more difficult to clearly state that the target is threat to the own ship.
In the presented situation, after the appropriate vector lengthening (change of the Vector time parameter), such assessment becomes
easier.
Of course, the length of the vectors should be adapted to the currently used range and the targets number sailing in the OS vicinity (e.g.,
when sailing in traffic separation systems, the number of objects may force the necessity to shorten the vectors, because the image
becomes less readable, and the information is difficult to interpret).
If the tracked target does not have a true vector displayed, it means that it is a fixed target (it does not move). Of course, in the case of
such an assessment, one should remember about the type of radar picture stabilization mode currently used (bottom track or water track
stabilization).
For a ship at the same course and speed as the own ship, its vector will be the same as that displayed for the own ship. Looking at the
lengths of the vectors, it is difficult to precisely determine the value of the speed or course of a tracked vessel, and therefore the navigator
must display appropriate target data in order to know the exact values.
However, the true vector presentation allows you to perfectly orientate in general situation around own ship, including collision
situations occurring between the tracked vessels. Such a general view allows for earlier planning of the strategy of crossing the water
area and solving dangerous situations in a comprehensive manner, not separately for each object.
Vector presentation (3).
In the case when relative vectors are displayed on the screen, the most dangerous ones will be those whose relative vectors pass the own
ship's position at a distance smaller than considered safe. In this case, it is also important to properly select the Vector time parameter,
as shown in the following illustrations.

The relative vectors elongation allowed for a more precise assessment of the passing distance. Range rings or VRMs representing a
specified by user CPALIMIT value can be displayed for better judgment.
Also, in the case of the relative vector presentation, there may be displayed targets without vectors. In this case, however, it will mean
that it is a ship that moves similarly to own ship (the target true course and true speed are very similar to the appropriate OS parameters).
It should also be noted that relative vectors allow for a faster overall interpretation of the collision situation. However, in order to fully
assess the situation, use the possibility of displaying both types of vectors, i.e., when true vectors are constantly displayed on the screen,
from time to time you should switch the mode to relative vectors and vice versa. What type of vectors is displayed permanently depends
to some extent on the individual navigator preferences, but also varies depending on the area type in which the navigation takes place.
Modern radars make it possible to select the type of presented vectors completely independent of the type of motion generally used.
Symbols used in radar and AIS graphic information (1)
In the first years of introducing ARPA devices to ships, no attention was paid to the need to standardize the symbols used to mark the
tracked objects and other graphic elements displayed on the radar screen.
This led to the complete freedom of choice of such symbols by producers. This meant that the same symbol could have a different
meaning depending on what radar (what manufacturer) was mounted on the bridge. This could lead to confusion in the interpretation of
the information by navigators who had chartered ships equipped with radar systems different from those they had used in the past. The
problem also occurred among the pilots, who manned ships in difficult to navigate areas, and in this case, changes to the radar systems
took place very often.
This situation has been corrected with Resolution A.823 (19), which referenced Annex E to IEC recommendation 872. It contained the
basic set of symbols used. In accordance with the recommendations of the Resolution, all equipment installed on ships from 1997
onwards had to display the symbols included in Annex E.
Subsequent documents concerned the general symbols used on the screens of navigation devices (they took into account not only radar
devices but also the AIS and ECDiS systems). This circular (Guidelines for the presentation of navigational-related symbols, terms and
abbreviations - SN / Circ.243) was approved in 2004 and then amended in 2008 (SN.1 / Circ.243 / Add.1), 2013, 2014 (SN.1 / Circ.243
/ Rev.1) and 2019 (SN.1 / Circ.243 / Rev. 2).
Symbols used in radar and AIS graphic information (2)
The requirements of Annex E to IEC Recommendation 872 for the recommended symbols were as follows:
 Source: prepared on the basis of Annex E to IEC recommendation 872.
Particularly noteworthy is the introduction of the same symbols for the three basic alarms: CPA / TCPA Warning (No. 8), Lost Target
Warning (No. 9) and New Target Warning (No. 7). A symbol has also been introduced to indicate which object has been selected, and
its target data report is displayed in the data field (No. 12).
Because the ground stabilization based on tracking a fixed target was also obligatory, a symbol was introduced to mark such object (No.
13).
Symbols used in radar and AIS graphic information (3)
Requirements concerning the symbology required for navigation devices were contained in SN.1 / Circ.243 / Rev.2 (2019):
 Source: SN.1/Circ.243/Rev.2 (2019).

Past positions and trails.

Radars with automatic target tracking should provide the ability to display information about the past target movement as:
o history of target movement (History, Past position);
o artificially generated afterglow (Trails, Afterglow).
The requirements for both types of information are set out in Resolution MSC.192 (79) in one sub-section.
According to it, it should be possible to change the length (time) of the echo motion afterglow, with an indication of its duration and
type. It should also be possible to select the type of afterglow (true or relative) after it has been cleared for all true motion modes.
The information presented on the screen in the form of an afterglow should be clearly distinguishable from echoes.
Either scaled trails or past positions or both, should be maintained and should be available for presentation within 2 scans or equivalent,
following:
o the reduction or increase of one range scale;
o the offset and reset of the radar picture position;
o a change between true and relative trails.
An example of such information visible on the Atlas Elektronik ARPA screen is presented in the figure below.
The history of the target movement can be displayed only for the tracked objects, while the trail shows the image of the echoes visible
on the radar screen during many antenna revolutions for a specified time in a way that allows them to be distinguished from the current
echoes. Therefore, for moving targets, it can be determined the direction of their movement and speed. In this case, the target acquisition
is not necessary.
Both types of past motion presentations can be available for both relative and true motion presentations. However, due to the relatively
general requirements formulated in Resolution MSC.192, many very different solutions can be found in practice.
In both cases (afterglow and history of targets), if the information is to be used to analyze the target maneuvers, only the information
presented in true motion should be used. One of the most common mistakes made by navigators is the use in these cases the relative
type of information. Then it is very easy to make a mistake (relative motion delusions). Superficial assessment of such information may
also lead to wrong decisions regarding the own ship's maneuvers.
Due to the general formulated requirements, many different solutions can be found in practice. Particular attention should be paid to
what settings the type of displayed information depends on. In the case of trails, a common solution is their dependence on the type of
selected motion, while the type of history may depend on the type of displayed vectors. If in doubt, pay attention to additional information
describing these functions (often letters: R - Relative, T - True) or refer to the description of the function in the instruction manual.
For both functions, it is possible to change the time parameter. While in the case of trails, its total length is defined, expressing the path
that the echo has traveled in a given time. In the past position/history case the time parameter defines the interval in which subsequent
positions of the tracked target are marked.
Potential Points of Collision (PPC).
Potential Points of Collision (PPC) can be determined assuming that the actual target motion parameters (course and actual speed), its
position in relation to the own ship (bearing and distance) and the own ship's speed are known. The basic assumption in this type of
calculations or graphic operations is that the target will not take maneuver and the own ship can only alter the course.
Determining the PPC positions enables determination of the most dangerous courses for the own ship (while maintaining its speed) at
which a collision may occur. However, this information is not sufficient from the point of view of navigation safety. Due to the fact that
the observed object is moving, it is difficult to precisely define courses that are safe for it, i.e., those that will additionally ensure a safe
passing distance (CPA).
An extension of this method is therefore the determination of the Potential Area of Danger (PAD), which takes into account such a
parameter as CPALIMIT. It should be noted that PPCs (if they can be assigned) will always be inside the PAD.
However, there are situations when no PPC can be determined due to the target position and too low speed of the own ship. Simply, at
too low speed, own ship is not able to follow a course that could lead to a collision. In other words, it is a completely safe situation for
OS if the tracked target does not start its maneuvers.
The following figures show the method of graphically determining the PPC.
As it is easy to notice, when own ship is faster, It is possible to assign always one (and only one) PPC. However, the situation becomes
more complicated when own ship is slower than target. In this situation it is possible to calculate one, two, or no PPC. It depends on the
relative position of the ships.
Potential Area of Danger (PAD)
Potential Area of Danger (PAD) can be determined with the same assumptions as PPC is calculated. An additional data which is also
included here is the value of the CPALIMIT (the limit of safe passing distance). Thanks to this, it is possible to set such safe courses of
own ship that will allow to obtain such a passing distance. This type of graphic presentation was used by SPERRY in its devices.
Similarly, to PPC determination, there are several possibilities here. The simplest situation occurs when own ship is faster - then one
PAD area can always be determined. Otherwise (own ship is slower), there may be two PADs calculated, one or none. In the last case,
it means a completely safe situation for the own ship, because at its low speed and position in relation to the target, it cannot get closer
to the opposing ship at a distance smaller than CPALIMIT.
The graphical method of PAD determining is shown in the figure below.
 Source: based on A. G. Bole W. O. Dineley "Radar and ARPA Manual", 1990.
Examples of the use PAD information in collision situation (the Rascar SPERRY device) are shown in the following illustrations.
In the above situation, the contact of the PAD areas drawn for targets 2 and 3 could suggest a possibility of crossing between them on
the border of violating the safe passing distance. The principle of using the PAD consists in determining the new true course safe for
own ship, which does not cross any PAD presented on the screen. Such a course change value can be determined using, for example,
EBL. This technique is presented in the next figure.

OS should change its course to starboard to EBL direction and will avoid all PAD areas and keep a safe passing distance.
When the maneuver was executed to starboard, it led to a safe situation.
Unfortunately, with many of its advantages, of which the simplicity of the analysis of the situation comes first, it also has some
disadvantages.
Namely, with a larger number of tracked targets and displaying on the radar screen a large number of areas, they may additionally
overlap picture and problems with making decisions could arise. In such a case, the navigator should always return to the traditional
form of graphic information presentation - vectors.
Sector of Danger (SOD)
Dangerous sectors determination (SOD - Sector of Danger) is based on the determination of such relative courses for the tracked echo
that ensure a safe passing the object at a given distance. Therefore, in this case, similarly to the designation of PAD areas, the value of
the safe passing distance must be known.
An example of a graphic method of SOD determination is shown in the figure below.

Source: based on A. G. Bole W. O. Dineley "Radar and ARPA Manual", 1990.

In this case, the sector is determined near the own ship, and its vertex lies at a point distant from the own ship's position by the length
of the true target vector. Thanks to the use of such a concept, the navigator also has the ability to plan a speed change maneuver. The
use of the displayed SOD consists in such a rotation / length change of the OS true vector so that its end will be outside of the SOD
region. This principle is shown in the figure below, where the navigator has the option of selecting three safe maneuvers (turn starboard,
turn port, or speed reduction).
Alphanumeric information.
Alphanumeric information consists of a series of descriptions, identifiers and reports placed on a screen around the radar image. The
main goal is to enable the operation of the device and the interpretation of the information presented. The reason for this is the transfer
of the traditional radar control panel to the screen in the form of appropriate buttons, lists or selection boxes.
The information visible on the screen allows to:
o proper interpretation of the situation around the ship (orientation, visualization, type of stabilization, etc.).
o conducting radar navigation (bearing, distance, geographical marker position etc.)
o more detailed and more accurate presentation (compared to graphical information) of information about tracked/observed
objects (target data report, AIS report).
Typically, the following types of information are available in alphanumeric form on the radar screen:
o picture orientation (North Up, Course Up, Head Up);
o motion type (True Motion, Relative Motion, CD Motion);
o radar picture stabilization mode (Sea, Ground Stabilization);
o target tracking functions (Acquisition, Cancel target, Target data);
o vector type and length (True Vectors, Relative Vectors, Vector Time);
o target data report (Target/Data: Source of data, actual bearing & range, predicted CPA & TCPA, true course & speed );
o AIS report (AIS Data: ship’s identification, navigational status, position where available and its quality, range &
bearing, COG & SOG, CPA & TCPA. Target heading and reported rate of turn (if available), additional target
information (on request).
o marker position (Marker position: Bearing/Range; Lat./Long.);
o range and bearing markers data (EBL, VRM);
o warnings (CPA/TCPA Warning, New Target Warning, Lost Target Warning, System Warnings, ....);
 o basic radar work parameters (Gain, Tune, ACS, ACR);
o display parameters (Display brightness).
Of course, in practice there are very different configurations of such information. It can be grouped into appropriate thematically related
fields or various types of selection lists, also containing information important for the navigator.
Sound information.
Sound information complements the primarily graphic and alphanumeric information and is associated with alarms and warnings
generated during operation. As a rule, an alarm/warning consists of a visual part (the relevant symbol/message is displayed) and an
acoustic part (the sound assigned to the alarm).
As in the case of alphanumeric information, in practice, various methods of audible alarm are encountered. As a rule, a specific type of
sound is assigned to a given type of alarm, but it is not obligatory. In this case, in the description of a specific type of alarm in the radar
manual, it can be information about the type of sound generated and possible configuration options (e.g., changing the sound type,
switching off the acoustic alarm, etc.)
If it is possible to completely disable the sound signaling for a given type of alarm, consider what the consequences may be (e.g., in the
case of a CPA/TCPA Warning alarm). If the sound alarm is completely turned off, the navigator will find out about the existing/reported
situation only when he comes to the radar screen and reads the alarm displayed in a graphic or alphanumeric form. This can cause a
significant delay in taking the appropriate action compared to if an audible alarm would also have been generated.
For this reason, not all types of alarms have the option of blocking this part of the alarm completely.
Alarms and warnings.
In accordance with requirements of Resolution MSC.192 (79), criteria for activation causes should be available for all alarms.
All alarms and announcements shall be in accordance with the IMO-approved Presentation of Navigational-related Information on
Shipborne Navigational Displays requirements.
Alarms and warnings can be divided into two basic groups:
o alarms closely related to the tracking target process of tracking, which include:
▪ CPA/TCPA Warning.
 ▪ Lost Target Warning.
▪ New Target Warning.
o warnings associated to system operation and indicating any anomalies in the system functioning.

CPA / TCPA Warning

In accordance with the requirements of Resolution MSC.192 (79), it is required to provide the warning about targets that may be
dangerous for OS.
If the calculated CPA and TCPA values for the tracked target or the activated AIS object are lower than the limits chosen by user:
o the CPA / TCPA Warning should be activated.
o the echo should be clearly indicated on the screen by using the appropriate symbol:

▪ - according to annex E of 872 IEC document (since 1997);

▪ (bold, red, flashing symbol with vector) - according to SN.1 / Circ.243 / Rev.2 (since 2019)
Set CPA / TCPA limits for both tracked targets and AIS objects should be identical. By default, the CPA / TCPA Warning functionality
should be applied to all activated AIS objects.
The alarm CPA / TCPA Warning can also be activated for inactive AIS targets at the user request.
A proper understanding of the alarm operation is essential for the own ship safety. In the original nomenclature, it was often referred to
as Collision Warning, which does not fully reflect its character. Of course, the possibility of a collision situation cannot be ruled out,
but after activating the CPA / TCPA Warning, the navigator should verify the actual estimated distance of passing (CPA). Because a
dangerous object will be the marked by the same symbol both in strictly collision situation as well as when target only slightly violates
the assumed safety zone (defined by the CPA LIMIT parameter).
Therefore, for a full assessment it is necessary to display the target data report (which in many radars is displayed automatically when
user confirm the CPA / TCPA Warning) and read the CPA value or verify situation based on the target's relative vectors.
The warning activation should be interpreted as follows: the indicated target will pass the own ship at a distance equal to or less than
the CPA LIMIT value, and the object will be passed in the time equal / shorter than the time limit set as TCPA LIMIT.
For correct indication of dangerous targets, user should set the CPA LIMIT / TCPA LIMIT correctly. When determining them, navigator
should take in consideration following factors:
o weather conditions, especially visibility;
o vessel's type and size (maneuverability);
o area type (open or restricted area, traffic intensity).
When the nature of navigation or the traffic intensity is changing, the rightness of the values CPA LIMIT / TCPA LIMIT parameters should
always be verified. Their values cannot be too high (unnecessary alarm activation for many objects - the information becomes not
selective) or too small (too late warning activation or no signaling of dangerous situations).

Lost Target Warning

According to the requirements of MSC.192 (97) Resolution, the system should alert the user if the tracked target is lost, and not canceled
based on a pre-determined distance or set parameters.
The last target position should be clearly indicated on the screen by the specified symbol:

o - according to annex E for 872 IEC document (since 1997);

o (bold, flashing symbol) - according to SN.1 / Circ.243 / Rev.2 (since 2019).

It should be noted that the Lost Target Warning can be activated if an object is not visible on the radar screen in 5 out of 10
consecutive scans. The target tracking process must be continued during this time.
It should be possible to enable or disable the lost target alarm function for AIS targets. A clear indication should be given if the lost
target alarm is disabled.
If the following conditions are met for a lost AIS target:
o The AIS lost target alarm function is enabled.
o The target is of interest, according to lost target filter criteria.
o A message is not received for a set time, depending on the nominal reporting rate of the AIS target.
Then:
o The last known position should be clearly indicated as a lost target and an alarm be given.
o The indication of the lost target should disappear if the signal is received again, or after the alarm has been acknowledged.
o A means of recovering limited historical data from previous reports should be provided.
New Target Warning
A New Target Warning according to MSC.192 (79) Resolution should be generated if the user-defined acquisition / activation zone
function is available. It should be possible to establish the ranges and boundaries of such a zone.
If an object not previously acquired / activated enters a zone or is detected inside such a zone, it should be clearly marked with an
appropriate symbol and an alarm should be triggered.
Provided symbols for the New target Warning are as follows:

o -according to annex E for 872 IEC document (since 1997);

o (bold, red, flashing symbol - according to SN.1 / Circ.243 / Rev.2 (since 2019).

System warnings
In case of alarms / warnings activation related to incorrect system operation or connected sensors malfunction, the functionality of the
system should be limited to fallback mode or in some cases it should be impossible to display the image.
The alarms related to the signaling of irregularities in the radar system operation and sensors malfunction are:
o picture freeze;
o Failure of Heading Information (Azimuth Stabilization);
o Failure of Speed through the Water Information;
o Failure of Course and Speed Over Ground Information;
o Failure of Position Input Information;
o Failure of Radar Video Input Information;
o Failure of AIS Input Information;
o Failure of an Integrated or Networked System.
The equipment should be capable of operating equivalent to a standalone system.
Basic ARPA facilities: TRIAL Maneuver (applied solutions, advantages, and disadvantages).
Introduction
According to the requirements of Resolution MSC.192 (97), the Trial maneuver function (TRIAL) is required on ships above 10,000 gt

Source: MSC.192(79) Resolution.

It should be noted, however, that from the very beginning (Resolutions IMO.422(XI) and IMO.823(19)), the regulations included the
requirements to equip such ships with min. one ARPA device. One of the obligatory functions in it was the Trial maneuver function.
There was no such obligation for ATA devices, and even less for the EPA. So, it can be concluded that nothing has changed in this
respect.
In practice, of course, it is very common to find that radar devices with automatic target tracking installed on smaller vessels also provide
access to the TRIAL function.
Is the use of the TRIAL function obligatory? What are the benefits of using the TRIAL function?
Of course, the navigator should always use all the technical possibilities available on the bridge, both during the analysis of the situation
around the own ship and when solving collision situations. Having already some professional experience, he is most often able to
correctly assess the situation based on vector information only and plan an appropriate anti-collision (or other) maneuver without using
the TRIAL function. However, in doubtful situations, it is always worth remembering this possibility. Thanks to the TRIAL function,
user can always verify his previous assessments by checking the planned maneuver before executing it.
Requirements for the TRIAL function.

With the development of radar devices enabling automatic echo tracking, the technical requirements have changed as well. This also
applied to the TRIAL function.
In Resolutions IMO.422 (XI) and IMO.823 (19), the TRIAL function was required in ARPA devices, which in practice meant the
requirement on ships above 10,000 gt. In this case, nothing has changed in Resolution MSC.192 (79), and the limit of requirements has
remained the same there.
However, the very content of the paragraphs related to the TRIAL function has changed.

In IMO Resolution 823(19) the requirements were as follows:

o The ARPA should be capable of simulating the effect on all tracked targets of an own ship maneuver with without time
delay before maneuver without interrupting the updating of target tracking and display of actual target alpha-numeric
data. The simulation should be indicated with the relevant symbol on the display.
o The operating manual should contain an explanation of the principles underlying the trial maneuver technique adopted
including, if provided, the simulation of own ship’s maneuvering characteristics.
o It should be possible to cancel a trial maneuver at any time.
However, in Resolution MSC.192(79), the requirements were formulated as follows:
The system should, where required by table 1, be capable of simulating the predicted effects of own ships maneuver in a potential threat
situation and should include own ship’s dynamic characteristics.
A trial maneuver simulation should be clearly identified.
The requirements are:
o The simulation of own ship course and speed should be variable.
 o A simulated time to maneuver with a countdown should be provided.
o During simulation, target tracking should continue, and the actual target data should be indicated.
o Trial maneuver should be applied to all tracked targets and at least all activated AIS targets.

Comparing these two resolutions, it should be noted that the targets must be tracked, and any changes in their motion parameters and
their impact on the effects of the planned maneuver should be visualized on the radar screen. Thanks to this, the user will not be surprised
when the situation changes after the function has been turned off.
Significant changes concern the simulation method. At present, it must be a dynamic presentation of the effects of the planned maneuver
(i.e., taking into account the OS maneuvering characteristics), which was previously one of the available options.
The necessity to introduce a delay time option along with its countdown was clearly indicated. Such a requirement was not clear before.
The requirement for the TRIAL function to be available not only for tracked targets but also for active AIS objects has been added. This
may raise some doubts, as the use of information about the movement of objects over the ground for planning. It may cause erroneous
assessment and less accurate planning. During maneuver planning information about traffic through the water should be chosen. In
particular, the mixing of both types of information on one screen should be avoided (some objects are acquired and information on true
movement through the water is available, and for some, only AIS information is available).
TRIAL - static form of presentation (1).
The static form of presentation is the least accurate form of planning a ship's maneuvers. The reason for this is that it does not take into
account the maneuvering characteristics of the own ship. If the navigator performs exactly the maneuver planned on the radar screen,
the CPA values obtained for the tracked targets may differ significantly from the planned values. The differences will be the greater the
slower the maneuver will be performed (in particular, it depends on the size and OS maneuverability). The maneuver is planned in the
same way as the planning done on a plotting sheet.
Of course, this approach forces the user to use other methods to compensate for this disadvantage. In the event that it is not possible to
introduce a delay of the planned maneuver (Delay Time), then a larger maneuver can be planned, knowing that the real CPA value
obtained will be smaller and the ships will pass at a shorter distance. It is important to know that this is a safe CPA value.
The available option of Delay time parameter use for maneuvers planning gives more possibilities. Simply plan the maneuver for the
foreseeable future situation but start to execute the maneuver earlier. It should be completed before the delay time end. Of course, in
this case, the user needs to know the OS maneuvering characteristics and understand exactly how to interpret the entered Delay time
value.
Fortunately, the TRIAL static form of presentation slowly becoming to the past and was practically allowed in radar devices
manufactured until 2008. In accordance with the requirements of Resolution MSC.192(79), a dynamic presentation is required.
TRIAL - dynamic form of presentation (1).
The dynamic form of the TRIAL presentation makes it possible to clearly visualize the effects of the planned maneuvers compared to
the static method. It was already included in the requirements of Resolution IMO.823(19) and should be obligatorily used from 2008
(Resolution MSC.192(79)).
In order to enter information about the own ship's maneuverability, the user can use the following (easy to interpretation) parameters:
o Turn rate - [0/min];
 o Turn radius - [NM];
o Speed rate – [kn/min].
The first two are obviously related to the planned course change (and are related to each other), and the third is speed change. In the
case of a planned course alteration, the Turn radius value is automatically calculated after changing the Turn rate parameter and vice
versa.
Despite its simplicity in use, the parameters related to the own ship's maneuverability ensure sufficient planning accuracy. However, it
should always be remembered that the calculated effects of the planned maneuver strictly depend on the true target data accuracy,
therefore it is not allowed to plan too risky maneuvers.
During the TRIAL dynamic presentation is used when changing the course/speed value, the appropriate shifts of own ship and the
corresponding temporal shifts of the targets' vector positions are calculated. Therefore, the scheduled maneuver may be executed after
the delay time expire. As required, such possibility (Delay Time) is provided with a countdown. This certainly facilitates the
interpretation of the situation visible on the radar screen.
Additional features of the TRIAL function.
Additional options related to the trial maneuver may be available in various types of ARPA. However, they are not strictly required by
law, so they are not obligatory.
These features include:
o the option to display in the target data (in place of currently calculated CPA and TCPA values) new CPA and TCPA
values corresponding to the OS planned course and/or speed (Trial target data);
o the option of activating an additional Trial CPA/TCPA Warning associated to the planned OS maneuver and taking into
account the same warning limits (CPAlimit and TCPAlimit), meaning that the planned maneuver is not safe for own ship (it
is also possible to simultaneously display the dangerous target symbol on the radar screen);
o Delay Time/TTM drop to zero from Trial warning activation;
 o the possibility of second trial maneuver planning as an extension of the first planned maneuver (2nd maneuver).
Limitations of the TRIAL function.
Regardless of the features and options available for the trial maneuver navigator must take into account the following limitations when
use Trial:
o the TRIAL lets obtain information only for enough early acquired and stably tracked targets.
o ARPA does not take into account the COLREG regulations, therefore the navigator must remember that the planned
maneuver should be large enough, made in ample time and with due regard to the observance of good seamanship, which
is especially important during restricted visibility;
o ships for which a maneuver is planned may take their own maneuvers that are not included in the anti-collision action
planning;
o the planned course change does not take into account the reduction of own ship speed, which, especially during significant
maneuvers, may affect the difference between the planned and obtained CPA values.
Basic ARPA facilities: TRIAL Maneuver (actual applications).
Introduction
Due to the general content of the requirements contained in the IMO resolutions concerning the Trial maneuver function (Lecture No.
3), in practice many different solutions can be found. They differ not only in the method of operation, the names of available options
but also in the possibilities of assessing the consequences of the planned maneuver.
Practical implementations are illustrated in the following subsections. Of course, they do not cover all the practical methods of
implementing the TRIAL maneuver function, and therefore it is important that the system user should carefully read the description of
the simulation method used in a given radar device (included in the radar operating manual), its possibilities and limitations.
POLARIS - KONGSBERG (1)
In this device, the own ship's maneuvers are planned in dynamic form, i.e., the own ship maneuvering abilities are taken into account.
The function has been well designed, and its operation should not cause problems for the user.
The used arrangement of parameters and information is legible.
The main advantages of the practice maneuver function in the POLARIS device include:
o dynamic presentation of the planned maneuver;
o automatic switching of the radar operation mode for sea stabilization when the TRIAL function is activated;
o easy change of OS maneuvering parameters available in a wide range and throughout the planning time (Turn rate, Turn
Radius, Speed rate);
o clear form of information on the screen (available Relative and True vectors);
o the use the circle of CPALIMIT presentation, which in combination with the relative vector’s presentation is a great aid in
the situation assessment process;
o displaying new (obtained as a result of the planned maneuver) CPA and TCPA values in target data reports;
o delay time alarm for scheduled maneuver;
o second maneuver function available (can be used by more advanced users).
However, TRIAL has got some disadvantages and they are:
o no extinguishing/displaying the symbols of dangerous targets;
o poor signaling of the second maneuver activation, which may be confusing to the user.
FURUNO 2805 (1)
In this device, the own ship's maneuvers are planned in a static mode, without the own ship maneuvering characteristic parameters use.
The function has been reasonably well designed, and its operation should not cause problems for the user.
The used arrangement of parameters and information is clear.
The main advantages of the use of Trial maneuver function in the FURUNO device include:
o readability of information on the screen (available Relative and True vectors);
 o using the option to enable/disable dangerous targets symbols during maneuver planning;
o displaying new (obtained as a result of the planned maneuver) CPA and TCPA values in target data reports.
However, the disadvantages of this function include:
o static form of Trial maneuver presentation;
o no automatic switching of the radar operation mode to sea stabilization when the TRIAL function is activated;
o no countdown of the Delay time for a scheduled maneuver.
ATLAS 9600 (1)
In this device, the own ship's maneuvers are planned in a static mode, i.e. without taking into account the own ship's maneuvering
characteristic.
The function has been designed in a way that is not very user-friendly, which may cause problems for the user in operate it.
The use of regulators is not so clear and the TRIAL function itself blocks the possibility of using other functions.
The advantages of the use of Trial maneuver function in the ATLAS 9600 device include:
o smooth simulation of changes in relative vectors during maneuver planning;
o clear indications of the value of the new course, speed, and delay of the planned maneuver.
However, the disadvantages of this function include:
o static form of presentation;
o blocking other radar functions during maneuver operation;
o the possibility to change relative vectors to true ones;
o no possibility to display target data reports;
o no access to the exact values of CPA and TCPA obtained as a result of the planned maneuver;
o no extinguishing/displaying symbols of dangerous targets.
Basic ARPA facilities: Automatic and manual target acquisition.
Target acquisition
In the case of radar devices with automatic target tracking, the acquisition consists in initiating the tracking process by pointing the
position around which a tracking gate will be generated. This process can be performed manually by the user (manual acquisition) or
automatically after switching on the automatic target detection system (automatic acquisition). Both types of acquisition work
independently of each other, i.e., the user can acquire targets manually, also when using automatic acquisition.
The acquisition requirements contained in Resolution MSC.192 (97) are as follows:
• Manual acquisition of radar targets should be provided with provision for acquiring at least the number of targets specified in
table below.
• Automatic acquisition should be provided where specified in the table below. In this case, there should be means for the user
to define the boundaries of the auto-acquisition area.

As can be seen, the minimum required number of targets that can be acquired depends on the size of the ship on which the device is
mounted but does not depend on the used type of acquisition.
Of course, these are the minimum limit of requirements, so in practice there are devices that enable tracking more echoes, and automatic
acquisition can often be available also on smaller ships.
It is worth noting also similar requirements regarding the number of active AIS objects. This is important because the automatic
acquisition areas can also be used for automatic activation of AIS objects.
Manual acquisition
The manual acquisition is the most used form of echo input for tracking.
In practice, navigators often give the possibility of specific echoes selection for acquisition as the reason. However, this selectivity of
choice requires a systematic assessment of the situation. Trails are certainly a helpful function in this regard. Then, based on the displayed
on the screen information, user can decide whether to acquire a specific echo.
From the user view, manual tracking is very simple. It is enough to point the marker over the observed echo position and use the
appropriate command button (e.g., ENTER, ENTER PLOT, ACQUIRE TARGET). At this point, a command to start the chosen echo
tracking is sent to the computer and a tracking gate is generated at the indicated position. In the initial phase, the gate has increased
dimensions, so that the echo should not go outside its area. In this case, the tracking process would not be attempted.
At the time of tracking initiation, it is also automatically verified whether there is another tracking gate in close proximity to the indicated
position. This would mean that a tracking process is already taking place there. Thus, it is not possible to re-acquire the same target or
an echo lying very close to an already tracked echo (no position inside an already existing tracking gate can be indicated again).
During the subsequent antenna revolutions, the echo is detected again, and the following positions of the tracking gate are moved along
with its movement. Gradually, the calculated parameters of the target's movement stabilize and (after achieving the accuracy specified
by the manufacturer) the tracking process begins.
Automatic acquisition
Automatic acquisition is based on the automatic detection and tracking initiation of target echoes located inside the specific area.
The New Target Warning is associated with this function. Any new untracked echo detected in the auto-acquisition area will trigger an
alarm. This echo will be marked on the radar screen with the indicated symbol until the alarm is acknowledged.
The shapes and dimensions of the auto acquisition area can be defined differently. The most common solutions are:
o automatic acquisition zones;
 o automatic acquisition rings.
At present, there is no solution that covers all the tracking area or the radar range with the automatic acquisition area due to the problems
related to acquiring also clutters (e.g., strong clutters of waves or rain) and shoreline echoes. Although algorithms are used to eliminate
such interference or to distinguish very large echoes (shoreline) from ship echoes, there is a high probability of generating false alarms
distracting the navigator. Additionally, in such situations the tracking system could be blocked (reaching the maximum number of
tracked targets). Therefore, a better way is certainly to use automatic acquisition only in selected areas.
The use of appropriate parameters enables the user to adjust the size and shape of the automatic acquisition area to the current situation.
An interesting solution extending the possibility of using automatic acquisition during navigation near land (e.g., straits, narrow
passages) is the possibility of additional delineation of boundary lines (barriers), resulting in additional limitation of the area of automatic
acquisition. However, unlike the parameters of the area itself, which usually define it in relation to the own ship's position and course,
barriers are defined in relation to fixed targets or to land. As a result, they are immobile in relation to fixed targets. They make it possible
to limit areas such as land echoes, ships at anchor, groups of fishing vessels, etc. Of course, in waters with currents (in order to stabilize
barriers), ground stabilization of the radar picture should be used.
Why is the automatic acquisition rarely used in practice? Its advantages seem to be underestimated. As a rule, it is believed that the
zone/rings are useful only when there are no other vessels in the own ship vicinity and the navigator wants only to prevent overlooking
the new echo. However, other situations where the use of an automatic function can be beneficial are also conceivable, namely:
1. Navigating in heavy traffic area: In these situations, tracking targets are often lost due to obscuring each other. The use of
automatic acquisition will allow such objects to be quickly put back into tracking. It will also make it possible to prevent
overlooking an echo from a small ship when a large number of targets are tracked, and their vectors may cover such echo on the
screen. The automatic acquisition zone will definitely be more effective in such a case, especially if it is possible to use the
barrier function at the same time.
2. Ship safety at anchor: In this case, activation of automatic acquisition near own ship will be an additional element of
observation. The alarm will be activated when an unidentified/untracked vessel is approaching own vessel at anchor.
And of course, in any other situation, when the targets detection and their acquisition should take place as soon as possible, navigator
should consider using the automatic acquisition.
Automatic acquisition zone
The auto acquisition zone(s) may of course be of any shape designed by the manufacturer. Changing the shape and size can be performed
using a set of available parameters. In most cases, such zones are defined in relation to the own ship's position and its course. Therefore,
when the own ship is moving and during course change maneuvers, the zone moves with it and changes its position.
The main advantage of such a zone is its size and the lack of "dead" areas, as is the case with automatic acquisition rings. Therefore, its
effectiveness is also greater.
An example of such a zone is the solution used by the Norcontrol / Kongsberg companies.
Thanks to such parameters as:
o maximum ACQ zone range;
o maximum ACQ zone starboard border;
o maximum ACQ zone port border;
o minimum ACQ zone range;
o aft sector;
the user has great possibilities to adjust the zone area to the current situation. In this case, it is necessary to ensure both early detection
of targets and protection against generating false alarms (e.g., waves, land echoes).
An interesting extension of the possibilities of such a zone was the option to generate additional boundary lines (barriers), which were
defined in relation to the bottom, and therefore did not move with the own ship position. This made it possible to "cut out" certain areas
of the zone's activity without having to reduce its base area. The operation of the barriers is presented in the following figures.

The change of the own ship's position along the land and objects located within the anchorage area resulted in a change of the dead areas
boundaries (defined by the barriers) and the detection of two new targets (they were in the active area of the zone).
Automatic acquisition rings
A common solution is the use of two automatic acquisition rings. The main task of the outer ring is to quickly detect and acquire echoes
of large targets appearing on the screen at large distances. Since not all targets are visible at these distances, the second ring is designed
to acquire smaller targets' echoes. The rings are also generally used with a constant width.
Due to that there is a certain dead zone between rings, the effectiveness of such a solution is certainly lower compared to the automatic
acquisition zone. Therefore, the user should not rely solely on this method of acquisition in this case. When a new echo appears on the
screen between the rings or inside the inner ring, he should manually acquire it. This will allow him to obtain reliable data faster.

Such a situation is shown in the figure. Wrong setting of the rings' sectors may additionally result in the target will not being acquired
at all.
The parameters usually available to the user are:
o the angle of rings activity (independently for starboard and port side; the setting may apply to both rings simultaneously
or each of them can be adjusted separately);
o ring distance from the own ship's position (such solutions are most often found when the adjustment can be made only
for the outer ring; the inner ring is then a constant ring, without the possibility of changing this parameter);
o the ring width (however, the most common solutions are solutions with rings with a constant width within 0.5 - 1.0 NM);
 o the possibility of excluding one of the rings (most often it concerns the outer ring).

The above figures show the difference in the ability to adjust the active ring angle. When ship navigates near land and the user has the
only option of limiting this parameter for both rings simultaneously, a large dead angle is created near the own ship. The solution
enabling independent adjustment of the angle for both rings is certainly more flexible and allows to be better adapted to a specific
situation.
Of course, some solution is also to disappear the outer ring and secure own ship using only the inner ring. However, user should then
manually acquire more distant targets. In this case, automatic acquisition will play the role of an additional protection against small
target echoes.
If there is the ability to adjust the rings' width, it should not be limited too rashly, as this reduces the probability of untracked targets
detection.
Examples of automatic acquisition
There are many different solutions for the automatic acquisition in practice. Resolution MSC.192(79) requires only that automatic
acquisition areas should be clearly displayed on the radar screen. As already mentioned, there are mainly two types: zones and automatic
acquisition rings.
Selected examples of the automatic acquisition function are presented below in order to show the differences that the navigator may
meet in practice.
POLARIS
The Kongsberg device uses an automatic acquisition zone. The cone parameters allow adjust it size and shape to the situation around
the own ship. They have been described in detail in the characteristics of this solution type.
The large area allows for effective target acquisition. The zone also allows user to activate AIS objects located within it.
Additionally, for automatically acquired targets, user can select the option of their automatic canceling when they leave this zone.
Unfortunately, the barrier function that was used in the company's earlier devices is not available. This limits the use of the automatic
acquisition zone near the land.

The automatic acquisition is activated by the field . It is carried out for echoes located within a defined automatic acquisition
zone. The size and shape of the zone can be adjusted in the ARPA menu on the right side of the screen. Zone parameters that can be

changed using buttons are distances:

o Forward;
o Starboard;
o Port;
o Minimum Track Range;
o Stern Blind Sector.
When a new echo is detected inside the zone, it is marked with a square drawn with a dashed line and, incomplete data appears in the
field of the target data report. In the lower part of the relevant field, a text message appears informing about the automatic echo
acquisition (AUTO ACQUIRE). After a while, the NEW TARGET warning is activated, the target vector is displayed, the target data
report is updated, and the text information changes from AUTO ACQUIRE to AUTO TRACKING.
Source: developed on the basis of SO-0681-F2 Polaris Technical Manual Section 5c Radar ARPA.
ATLAS 9600
In the case of the ATLAS 9600 device, two automatic acquisition rings are used with the following properties:
1. The rings have a constant width.
2. Active sectors can be defined using two types of barrier lines.
3. Rings can be started in two modes:
▪ without the possibility of changing their distances (distances of 4 and 6 NM are set permanently);
▪ the distance of each ring to own ship position can be adjusted.
Additionally, user can enter two types of boundary lines (barriers):
 ▪ relative (their position is defined in relation to the own ship's position and course);
▪ true (their positions are defined relative to the bottom).
In both cases, after editing the barriers, they should be activated. The appearance of the acquisition circles before and after the barrier’s
activation (both barrier types) is presented in the pictures below.

BRIDGE MASTER SPERRY e-series

Targets can be acquired automatically using AUTO ACQ ZONES (AZ).
The function is available for each type of radar images and orientations.
Targets closer than 0.25 NM from own vessel position cannot be automatically acquired.
There are two safety rings (ANNULAR ZONES) and two safety zones (POLYGONAL ZONES), which are always displayed relative
to the own ship's course and position. When the target enters the auto-acquisition zone, the AZ ENTRY alarm will be triggered. If 60
objects are detected, the ZONES FULL alarm will be triggered.
To display the Auto ACQ Zones menu, user must activate the AUTO ACQ ZONES menu, then activates the selected area and edits it
on the radar screen. To do this, he must select the "EDIT" field, and then makes appropriate settings for the ring distance and the display
angle or polygon vertices of the automatic acquisition zone.
Source: developed on the basis of 357716A1- Emulated_BridgeMaster-E-series.
FURUNO FAR-2xx7
The Furuno FAR2XX7 device allows to acquire up to 100 targets with manual or automatic acquisition. A rare solution is the ability
to set limits for both types of acquisitions, while the total value of selected targets cannot exceed 100.
To enable the automatic acquisition area, user should activate TT ACQ MODE so that the TT TARGET menu is displayed. Then he has
to select TT SELECT and assign the maximum number of targets that can be entered manually and automatically.
The Furuno device allows to turn on one or two automatic acquisition zones. The first zone is available between 3 and 6 NM, the second
zone can be set anywhere on the screen as long as the first zone is active.
The available statuses of automatic acquisition zones are as follows:
o Blank: automatic acquisition disabled;
o SET: automatic acquisition is set;
o WORK: automatic acquisition activated;
o SLEEP: automatic acquisition suspended.
Inserting at least 2 acquisition points will activate the first acquisition zone. In order to create a 360 degrees area around the ship, it is
sufficient to place both points in a similar bearing ± 3 °. To create an AA (Auto Acquisition) area as a closed polygon, set a minimum
of 3 points. The maximum number of points for the construction of the automatic acquisition area is 10.
If a target, that has not previously been manually acquired, exceeds the area of automatic acquisition, an audible alarm will sound and
the symbol of the new target will flash over the echo. At the same time TT NEW TARGET or AIS NEW TARGET will be displayed in
the alarm field.
If the maximum number of targets (set in the TT SELECT menu that can be entered by automatic acquisition) is exceeded, the message
"TARGET-FULL (AUTO)" appears on the right side of the screen.

Source: developed on the basis of SO-1545P_Emulated_Furuno_FAR2XX7_Operators_Manual.

Radar system with automatic target tracking – construction and principles of operation.
1. Introduction
During many years of operation of radar devices that enable automatic target tracking, there has been both a change in technical
requirements developed for them and design changes. The currently operated devices are characterized by greater possibilities (increase
in the number of tracked targets, additional functions, increase in the required tracking accuracy). It is also possible thanks to the
technological improvement made at that time.
At the beginning of equipping ships with ARPA devices, they were often installed as an additional console of the already existing radar
system on the ship bridge (without its own transceiver block). Of course, on many ships the radar console was replaced with the ARPA
console and then it was a device installed as the main radar device. That is why it was commonly said that "ARPA is a radar with a
computer".
The role of the devices themselves has also changed. Initially, they were a separate element of the bridge equipment, but at present they
are an important element of the integrated system, using additional possibilities resulting from cooperation with other systems (eg AIS,
ECDIS).
Of course, the most visible change is the display appearance. Monitors (initially monochromatic and later color type) have been
introduced in place of radaroscopic lamps. This enabled a better presentation of information on the screen.
Another visible change concerns the way devices are handled. In many cases, the control panel has also been moved to the radar screen
and only the pointing device (computer mouse, trackball) and a system of windows and selectable options are used to operate individual
functions. This operating system has become more intuitive.
The principle of work, however, is still similar. The radar device must acquire information in the radar picture form of a radar image,
transform it into a form enabling automatic targets detections, enable the acquisition and automatic tracking of targets, and merge the
radar picture with graphic information on one screen. Of course, this process is briefly presented here.
As already mentioned, the operation of radar devices is functionally very similar. Only the way information is processed has changed.
Thanks to the technological improvement, it is possible to quickly process information about larger number of targets in a very short
time and present the output information on the screen.
Therefore, these tasks do not have to be implemented on the basis of a properly designed hardware platform, but in the form of
applications using advanced computer configurations.
2. The ARPA architecture
Due to the tasks performed (with a more traditional approach), the following blocks can be schematically distinguished in the radar
system:
o antenna & transceiver block;
o extractor;
o tracking system (computer system);
o radar display;
o control panel.
A functional diagram of the ARPA device is shown below.
2. The ARPA architecture
2.1. The extractor
The extractor – it is the link between the radar and the computer processing block.
The main the extractor task is data analysis, consisting of processing radiolocation information obtained in one antenna rotation.
The scope of primary processing includes the following:
o radar signal discretization in time and level quantization;
o echoes detection against clutters;
o calculating of the echo center coordinates and possibly the target size;
o distinguish between land-based echoes and echoes from targets that may be tracked;
o conversion of polar coordinates into rectangular ones.
The main extractor parameters are:
o the maximum detection range;
o the minimum detection range;
o the bearing and distance measurements accuracy;
o the land recognition criteria;
o acquisition modes;
o the maximum tracked targets limit;
o method of target position data forwarding for tracking.
The following parameters should be taken into account for extractor:
o the probability of echo detection (its value should be close to one);
 o the probability of false warning (its value should be as low as possible);
o the echo position accuracy (at greater position accuracy the system will be able to provide the operator reliable
information faster).

2.2. The tracking system

The tracking system – it is a computer system that processes information from many antenna rotations which has specific statistical
characteristics.
The main tasks performed by this block are:
o target acquisition;
o target tracking;
o CPA, TCPA values calculation;
o true targets data calculation using log and gyro data;
o trial maneuver calculations;
o warnings.

2.3. The radar display

The radar display is an element of the system whose task is to present in a clear form the current situation around the ship. For this
purpose, it combines the data received from the post-processing block with a true radar picture.
2.4. The control panel
The control panel is used to communicate with the computer.
It contains usually:
o switches;
o a keyboard;
o a manipulator;
o a set of digital or alphanumeric displays as well as elements of optical and acoustic signaling.
In different types of devices, it was possible to find a different arrangement of individual elements and the allocation of the functions
used. Therefore, the operation of devices of this type was most often specific and required a long time from the user to become familiar
with their operation.
As already mentioned, the radar operating functions have been transferred to the radar screen, thanks to which the operation has become
more intuitive and eliminated the need to adapt the eyesight in night conditions. It is also possible to use prompts addressed to the user,
displayed in the form of short descriptions that appear on the screen when the marker is placed on a specific field of the screen.
One of the first devices to use such solution was the ARPA Nucleus made by Kelvin Hughes. With this solution we can talk about
reducing the control panel to the power button and the keypad.
In each case, the task of the control panel is to select the radar operating parameters and to select information currently presented on the
screen.
3. The integrated bridge system
The radar device being part of the integrated bridge system is capable of transmitting and receiving information from other systems.
AIS and ECDIS certainly come to the fore here. However, the radar also receives information about the own ship's position from GPS /
DGPS, about the speed (various types of logs) and the course (gyrocompass).
It is also possible to send information about tracked targets and display them on the ECDIS screen.
An exemplary diagram of the choice of configurations and operating modes for the Kelvin Hughes Manta radar system is presented in
the diagram below.

Source: KH_Handbook Manta Part 1 of 2 issue 3 April 2012

Characteristics of the target tracking process implemented in ARPA (possibilities and limitations).
1. Definitions
In the case tracking process implemented in radar equipment different terms can be often meet such as estimation, smoothing routes
targets, filtration or just tracking. There are also many different definitions for these concepts depending on the field of their
application. Some of them are listed below.

Estimation
The estimation is a process allowing to conclude assessed value on the basis of indirect, inaccurate and dubious observation. The
estimation can be understood as the process of choice of the best assessing point from the constant space.
Estimation (or estimating) is the process of finding an estimate, or approximation, which is a value that is usable for some purpose even
if input data may be incomplete, uncertain, or unstable. The value is nonetheless usable because it is derived from the best information
available (Source: Enloe L., Elizabeth Garnett, Jonathan Miles, Physical Science: What the Technology Professional Needs to
Know (2000)).
Tracking
The tracking is the state estimation of the moving object basing on remote measurements. It is realized with using one or more sensors
being in fixed positions or on moving platforms.
Tracking can be understood as the special case of the estimation. However, in a wider range they aren't being used only estimation tools,
but a need of wide using the theory of statistical decisions also exists, when certain practical problems are being solved (e.g., linking
data).
Targett tracking is the continuous measurement of parameters (e.g., azimuth, distance, velocity) of a moving object (target) using devices
that use the object's ability to emit or reflect electromagnetic waves in a manner different from the background (Source: Encyklopedia
PWN).
Filtration
The filtration is the state vector (current) estimation of the dynamic system – using the word “filter” results from it, that process of
getting the best estimation on the base noised data consists in filtering the noise out. At that notion the filtration is used in the meaning
of preliminaries of undesirable signals who in this case are understand as noise.
Kalman filtering
The Kalman filtering is the vector of target’s position estimating method which describes target state and measurement value (output).
This sequence method of proceeding let to obtain statistical optimized value of state vector. This function optimizing loss function
(estimation errors).
Kalman filtering is an algorithm that provides estimates of some unknown variables given the measurements observed over time. Kalman
filters have been demonstrating its usefulness in various applications. Kalman filters have relatively simple form and require small
computational power. (Source: https://www.intechopen.com/books/introduction-and-implementations-of-the-kalman-
filter/introduction-to-kalman-filter-and-its-applications).
2. Tracking
The tracking process is carried out automatically from the moment of target acquisition. In each antenna rotation, a certain area is
determined within which detection of a specific target is carried out. This area is called the tracking gate.
All the time the tracing process is stabilized (increase tracking accuracy) by using information from a previous antenna revolutions. A
characteristic feature of the applied filtration is the recursive process of calculations, during which the previous calculations (results)
also affect their current result.
The use of an appropriate tracking algorithm (Kalman filter or its modifications) allows to achieve the accuracy required by IMO within
3 minutes from the target acquisition. The current requirements are in Resolution MSC.192 (79).
The following steps can be distinguished in the tracking process:
o prediction - predicting a new position during the next, future observation on the basis of the current position of the
tracked target and its movement direction and speed;
o position and speed correlation - determination of a new current position, movement direction and speed based on the
predicted and currently measured target position.
These steps are carried out alternately:
 o first, the system predicts the future target position in the next antenna rotation. A tracking gate of a certain size is placed
around this position.
o then the current target position is determined.
o the next step includes comparing both positions (predicted and measured) and determining the necessary correction of
the target motion parameters in order to re-predict its position.
3. Target position
The target position is calculated based on the analysis of all elements within the echo tracking gate. There are different solutions (used
to calculate the target position). It is common to find the echo position in its center (4) or in the middle of the front echo edge (1). The
position marked with 3 is in the middle bearing and at the distance to the echo measured along that bearing.
The choice of a particular algorithm definitely has an impact on the accuracy of large target tracking in close position. Depending on
the adopted algorithm, the target gate position will shift more or less along tracked ship when the own ship position (the antenna position)
is changed in relation to this echo. The highest value of such a shift occurs in the case of no 1 type position.
4. Track smoothing
The recorded route of the moving target with steady motion (change of the registered target position) is not a straight line because of
radar measurement errors.
Taking into account the fact that in the tracking target process measurements are taken in very short time intervals, the values of
measurement target position errors are very similar to target position change during one antenna rotation.

The use of filtration allows to eliminate these errors and "smooth" this route. For this, however, the filter needs a longer observation
time (increasing the number of measurements taken into account in the calculations). As a result, along with the tracking process, the
accuracy of the calculated data of the object increases. The smoothing of the target route in the example below is achieved by entering
an additional corrected position on the basis of which the predicted positions are calculated (from the 3rd step of estimation). Such
positions may be computed/corrected at the position correlation step.
The figure shows how the prediction of the target's position for the next antenna rotation (prediction) works. In the initial phase of
tracking, the measured position is more reliable, but as the tracking time lengthens, the next estimated positions will be closer to the
positions predicted in the previous step of calculations. Thanks to this, the filter "collects" information about the actual movement
direction and speed during many observations, and the predicted route is smoothed. Of course, the presented method is to show only the
principle of the filter's operation. At present, more advanced work algorithms are used.
It should be remembered that the filter must show some flexibility at the same time and targets are not lost during target's maneuvers.
Therefore, there must be a compromise between the filter accuracy and the ability to detect (and react) potential tracked target
maneuvers.
5. Tracking gate
An important element of the tracking process is the Tracking gate. Generally speaking, this is the area where (during each antenna
rotation) the detection of a specific tracked target will be carried out. A separate tracking gate is generated for each tracked target.
The dimensions of the tracking gate are automatically changed during the tracking process and depend on its current state.
The tracking gate must be relatively large in the initial phase of tracking because there could be some problems with starting the process.
At this step, there is no information about the target movement direction and speed, or this information is very inaccurate. In accordance
with the requirements of Resolution MSC.192 (79), radar devices must track targets with a relative speed of up to 100 knots.
Additionally, when the navigator uses manual acquisition, he may indicate the first target position with poor accuracy. Also, be aware
of the accuracy of the automatic echo positioning process itself. All these elements must be taken into account when the first tracking
gate (its size) is created.
However, as the tracking process begins to stabilize, the dimensions of the gate may be reduced. It could be done because the probability
of correctly computing of the predicted position increases. Reducing the dimensions of the tracking gate also prevents the possibility of
target swop. This phenomenon can occur when two echoes are within one tracking gate at the same time. In this situation the common
position is computed for both targets and the vector (actually a tracking gate) can be transferred from one to the second target.
When tracking gate achieves the minimum dimensions, they are dependent only to the radar measurement errors' values. Then the size
of the tracking gate does not change unless the echo disappears from radar screen (e.g., it is obscured by another target) or a target
maneuver is detected. In such cases, the size of the tracking gate should be increased to be sure that the tracking target will be not lost.
The process of the tracking gate size adaptation to the current state tracking is shown in the figure above. It shows the reduction of the
gate dimensions while tracking is in a steady state and its re-increase when the ship's maneuver is detected (the difference between the
predicted and measured position increased). When target maneuver is completed, the tracking process is stabilized again, and target
gates dimensions are reduced to the minimum.
This drawing is intended to present only the idea of adaptive change in the dimensions of the tracking gate. For the simplicity, the
tracking gate shape is in the square form. In practice, however, it may be a circle, or a segment of the ring bounded by two distances
and two bearings.
ARPA errors, their sources, `and rules of identification. Delays in providing information.
1. The tracking process accuracy
Requirements for the tracking process accuracy implemented in ship radar devices are contained in subsequent resolutions developed
by the IMO.
A significant change in the precision requirements occurred with the publication of Resolution MSC 192(79). It concerned both the
determination of new values of acceptable errors for the tracked target movement parameters and the situations for which these
requirements are to be met.
The IMO Resolution A.823(19) (similarly to the previous one) provides maximum errors for 4 specific scenarios of ship meetings. There
is no such limitation in Resolution MSC 192(79). So, it can be concluded that the given accuracy should be maintained in all situations.
Unfortunately, there are no requirements for the adopted calculation algorithms. In the simplest method the CPA value could be
calculated on the basis of a predetermined relative course. This may raise a question if it is possible to meet the requirements for both
values (CPA and relative course) simultaneously?
The positive fact is that the requirements for the CPA and TCPA calculations accuracy increased. In the case of CPA, it is important
because the value of the distance to closest point of approach is a very important parameter taken into account by the navigator when
assessing the risk of a collision. It should be remembered, however, that the permissible maximum error of 0.3 NM is still a large value,
and the navigator should take this into account when assessing the situation and making a decision to take an anti-collision maneuver
(especially in restricted visibility).
But the requirements for accuracy of true motion parameters remained nearly at a similar level. The permissible error for true course
accuracy is ± 50, while the true speed value must be calculated with greater precision (although it depends on its value).
2. The IMO A.823(19) Resolution requirements
This Resolution was in force for ARPA devices manufactured until July 2008. Tracking accuracies were determined for specific four
ship encounter scenarios.
For the particular tracking steps and test scenarios, they were as follows:
 Source: IMO.823(19) Resolution.
The following pages will graphically present all four scenarios for which the distance requirements were specified along with the
permissible errors specified in the Resolution.
2.1. Scenario 1 - Res. A.823(19)
Scenario 1.
The above illustrations show:
o the situation described in scenario 1;
o acceptable error limits for the true target course and speed after 3 min of tracking;
o acceptable error limits for the CPA value, relative target course and speed after 1 min of tracking;
o acceptable error limits for the CPA value, relative target course and speed after 3 min of tracking.
The interpretation of the allowed trace errors is as follows:
After the specified tracking time, the end of the target vector should be inside the area defined by 2 bearing boundary lines and 2 velocity
boundary lines. The trapezoidal shape determined in this way takes into account the maximum error values allowed in the Resolution.
2.2. Scenario 2 - Res. A.823(19)
Scenario 2.
The above illustrations show:
o the situation described in scenario 2;
o acceptable error limits for the true target course and speed after 3 min of tracking;
o acceptable error limits for the relative target course and speed after 1 min of tracking;
o acceptable error limits for the relative target course and speed after 3 min of tracking.
The interpretation of the allowed trace errors is as follows:
After the specified tracking time, the end of the target vector should be inside the area defined by 2 bearing boundary lines and 2 velocity
boundary lines. The trapezoidal shape determined in this way takes into account the maximum error values allowed in the Resolution.
2.3. Scenario 3 - Res. A.823(19)
Scenario 3.
The above illustrations show:
o the situation described in scenario 3;
o acceptable error limits for the true target course and speed after 3 min of tracking;
o acceptable error limits for the CPA value, relative target course and speed after 1 min of tracking;
o acceptable error limits for the CPA value, relative target course and speed after 3 min of tracking.
The interpretation of the allowed trace errors is as follows:
After the specified tracking time, the end of the target vector should be inside the area defined by 2 bearing boundary lines and 2 velocity
boundary lines. The trapezoidal shape determined in this way takes into account the maximum error values allowed in the Resolution.
2.4. Scenario 4 - Res. A.823(19)
Scenario 4.
The above illustrations show:
o the situation described in scenario 4;
o acceptable error limits for the true target course and speed after 3 min of tracking;
o acceptable error limits for the CPA value, relative target course and speed after 1 min of tracking;
o acceptable error limits for the CPA value, relative target course and speed after 3 min of tracking.
The interpretation of the allowed trace errors is as follows:
After the specified tracking time, the end of the target vector should be inside the area defined by 2 bearing boundary lines and 2 velocity
boundary lines. The trapezoidal shape determined in this way takes into account the maximum error values allowed in the Resolution.
3. The MSC.192(79) Resolution requirements
The Resolution is valid for radar devices manufactured after July 1, 2008. In this case, no specific test scenarios are given, so it should
be assumed that the requirements apply to each meeting situation.
For the individual steps of tracking, the accuracy requirements are as follows:
 Source: MSC.192(79) Resolution.
First of all, the increase in the requirements for calculating CPA deserves attention. Now, after 3 minutes of tracking, the required
accuracy has increased to 0.3 mm. However, when deciding whether it will be safe to pass the ships or not, it should be taken into
account that it is still a relatively high value. Therefore, IMO draws attention to the problem of over-trust in the indications of radar
devices, which is reflected in the recommended subject matter of the 1.07 and 1.08 courses. Unfortunately, navigators often forget about
the need to consider possible tracking errors when making decisions in collision or doubtful situations.
4. Error sources
Errors related to the operation and use of radar devices with automatic target tracking for anti-collision and navigation activities can be
divided into three basic groups:
o errors generated inside the radar system - these errors are related to the radar signal propagation characteristics for
the selected radar operating frequency and the limitations of external equipment such as log, gyro compass;
o errors caused by inaccuracy of radar data processing - these errors are related to the type of target tracking algorithm
used and the accepted accuracy limits;
o interpretation errors - these errors are of the operator errors, mainly related to his experience in working with radar
systems and his current psychophysical state.
4.1. Radar measurement errors
1. Glint
It is an error resulting from the change of the size and shape of the echo in the subsequent revolutions of the antenna. This error is related
to the random bouncing of radar rays from individual elements of the tracked object together with the change of the angle of incidence
of these rays and the manner of reflected waves interference. For the length of the ship up to 200 m, the error reaches values up to 33m.
Of course, it also depends on the adopted algorithm for determining the echo position in a given radar.
2. Bearing measurement errors
o caused by the looseness of the antenna rotation gear;
o caused by the tilt of the antenna's rotation plane;
o associated to parallaxe phenomena error;
o connected to the asymmetry of the radar beam;
o due to quantization of the measured bearing.
3. Distance measurement errors
o caused by the distance changes at ship lists;
 o caused of measured distance quantization;
o caused by the received signal amplitudes change.
4.2. Heading and speed indicators errors
1. Gyro errors
o an error with a slowly varying random component not exceeding 0.250, having the same effect to all bearings.
2. Log errors
o constant speed indications errors will only cause incorrect calculation of the true target parameters and incorrect
maneuver planning using the TRIAL;
o variable log errors will also affect the calculated CPA and TCPA values (depending on the calculation algorithm used).

4.3. The tracking process limitations

The main tracking process limitations are:
o the tracking process stabilizes after 2.5 to 3 minutes since the acquisition.
o long delays in tracked target maneuvers detecting (even up to approx. 1 minute), which is particularly important in
conditions of restricted visibility
o the need to re-stabilize the tracking process after the tracked target completing the maneuver (again it is about 2-3
minutes);
o deterioration of the tracking quality of all objects related to the own ship's maneuver and the need to re-stabilize it after
the maneuver is completed.
o target swap possibility when two targets are inside one tracking gate in the same time (there will be no Lost Target
Warning);
 o lost target, when the echo does not appear on the radar screen in 5 out of 10 consecutive antenna revolutions (the Lost
Target Warning will be generated);
o the tracking process accuracy is dependent on the accuracy of information obtained from other devices (e.g., log,
gyrocompass, GPS), incorrect operation of these devices will worsen the accuracy of data presented in target data reports
and by vectors.

4.4. Navigator errors

Operator errors are mainly related to his experience in radar systems using and his current psychophysical state.
The main navigator errors are:
o mistake in interpreting the type of currently displayed vectors (true and relative);
o identify potential maneuvers of tracked targets based on the relative Past position/Trails information;
o treating the intersection point of true vectors always as a collision point;
o recognition of the target as maneuvering vessel based on the vector changes in the first tracking phase;
o recognition of the target as maneuvering vessel based on the vector changes during OS maneuver execution;
o treating of the Trial Target Data as the actual target passing parameters.
Of course, there are more types of mistakes that can be made. This list shows only those most frequently occurring during the
implementation of courses in the radar-navigation simulator. Not all of them result directly from the navigator's lack of knowledge but
may be caused by his fatigue or lack of sufficient concentration. Poor assessment of the situation often results from the routine conduct
of each situation without taking into account the specific circumstances related to it.
5. The characteristics of selected types of errors
Selected error types that affect the accuracy of the tracking process will be presented in more detail in the following sections.
5.1. Measurement errors due to ship rolling
The own ship's rolling (both longitudinal and lateral) causes the radar antenna to move in relation to its normal position (without any
list). All horizontal radar measurements, such as target range and bearing, are later referenced to the Consistent Common Reference
Point (CCRP). As a result of the rolling, the position of the antenna also moves relative to CCRP.
It should be stated that the lateral tilts (due to the size of the heel angles) have greatest importance for the error’s values in radar
measurements. That is why such errors are described in this subsection.
The rolling causes also that the plane of antenna rotation is tilted in relation to the sea surface, which results in asymmetric propagation
of the radar beam in space. This results in a number of additional errors affecting the accuracy of the tracking process. The permissible
error values included in the IMO resolutions apply to situations where the ship's heels do not exceed the values of ± 100, so at higher
values also larger tracking errors should be expected. Such errors include the so-called parallax error.
 Parallax error calculation.
Source: on the base of Bole A., Wall A.: "Radar and ARPA Manual." Second edition, 2005.
The error value can be calculated using simple trigonometric functions. The presented formula shows that the size of the error is directly
proportional to the antenna height, the amount of ship list and the relative bearing and inversely proportional to the distance between
the ships. If the ship's heels occur, the greatest error values will be achieved in ahead and astern of own ship, and the value equal zero
abeams. It is also logical that the greatest error will occur at the extreme roll values and zero if there is no list.
The error caused by the tilt of the antenna rotation plain has a different characteristic. The greatest errors in bearing measuring will
occur on the relative bearings 0450, 1350, 2250 and 3150. For rolling within ± 100, the average error is 0.220.
In the rolling case, distance measurement errors arise too. But the greatest errors will occur for target positions abeam of own ship, and
zero errors for the targets located ahead and astern of the own ship.
Another distance measurement error is caused by the change in the amplitude of the received signal. The radar usually measures the
echo range at the point at which the echo strength rich the preselected threshold level. But in practice the received pulse has sloping
leading edge. The measured range will be increased. Such error should not exceed 40 m.
 The error due to amplitude variation.
Source: on the base of Bole A., Wall A.: "Radar and ARPA Manual." Second edition, 2005.
Taking into account all the previously discussed error types, it can be concluded that there is practically no relative bearing for which
there are no errors in radar measurements. These errors do not reach large values, but a very disadvantageous for the tracking process
itself is the changes in their values (resulting from the current value of heel).
5.2. Quantization errors
Target position coordinates determined in a present antenna rotation must be converted into digital form to be used in further calculations.
The position of the antenna is determined with a resolution of 12 or 13 bits. When using the 12-bit resolution, it is possible to determine
4096 separate bearings, thanks to which the quantization interval is 0.090. Therefore, the maximum bearing quantization error is 0.0450.
This is half the value of the quantization interval.
Similarly, the measured distance value is transformed. In this case, for the 12 NM range, the quantization interval is 0.01 NM.
The quantization of the bearing and distance causes the object's bearing and distance to change steeply and not smoothly, which is shown
in the figure below.
 The quantization error.
Source: on the base of Bole A., Wall A.: "Radar and ARPA Manual." Second edition, 2005.
5.3. Target swap
The tracked objects can be swapped when two echoes are simultaneously inside one tracking gate.
Therefore, the probability that this error will occur in open waters is not high, unless there are strong waves or rain clutters. In this case,
the tracking gate may be moved to it.
As a rule, however, one can observe the target swap in waters with the dense ship traffic.
Moving the tracking gate to another target will not trigger the Lost Target Warning!
Examples of target swap:
1. When one echo is covered by second one the system moves the target gate to the closer echo.
2. Moving the tracking gate to strong echoes of waves.

3. The buoy echo used for the drift calculation has been obscured by the ship's echo, causing the tracking gate to shift from the buoy to
a moving object and miscalculate the current parameters.
5.4. Lost target
The radar system should continue to track the echo, which is clearly visible on the screen in 5 out of 10 consecutive scans. (MSC 192
(79)).
The echo could be lost in dense traffic if one ship obscures another tracked target, but they are not located in one tracking gate. In this
case, a Lost Target Warning will be generated, and the last position of the echo will be marked on the screen with the symbol until the
user acknowledges the alarm.
It means, however, that the alarm is generated with a certain delay (after a few antenna revolutions) and, as a rule, it is not possible to
continue lost target tracking when its echo reappears (user has to acknowledge the alarm and re-acquire the echo).
The interpretation of ARPA output data errors. Over- trust of risk in ARPA use
1. Interpretation errors
Operator errors are mainly related to his experience in radar systems using and his current psychophysical state.
The main navigator errors are:
o mistake in interpreting the type of currently displayed vectors (true and relative);
o identify potential maneuvers of tracked targets based on the relative Past position/Trails information;
o treating the intersection point of true vectors always as a collision point;
o recognition of the target as maneuvering vessel based on the vector changes in the first tracking phase;
o recognition of the target as maneuvering vessel based on the vector changes during OS maneuver execution;
o treating of the Trial Target Data as the actual target passing parameters.
Of course, there are more types of mistakes that can be made. This list shows only those most frequently occurring during the
implementation of courses in the radar-navigation simulator. Not all of them result directly from the navigator's lack of knowledge but
may be caused by his fatigue or lack of sufficient concentration. Poor assessment of the situation often results from the routine conduct
of each situation without taking into account the specific circumstances related to it.
1.1. Vectors interpretation errors
One of the most common errors in the interpretation of vector presentation is a mistake in the type of vectors displayed. The navigator
can interpret the whole situation in a way appropriate for relative vectors having true vectors displayed on the screen and vice versa. Of
course, the navigator's lack of attention is the reason of this situation.
Be aware that the duty officer has many activities to do during the watch and he is not standing all the time at the radar screen. Therefore
(in order to avoid such mistakes), he should always start the interpretation by checking the type of currently displayed information type
and switches its type to a more suitable one. This situation may occur especially when there are more people on watch and all of them
have different radar settings preferences.
Another common error is related to true vector interpretation. It consists in interpreting the situation as collision/dangerous whenever
the target true vector crosses the own ship true vector. Of course, such a situation cannot be excluded completely. However, it should
be ensured by setting the appropriate Vector Time parameter and assessing vectors' ends positions (both of OS and target), viewing the
relative vectors, or displaying the target's data report (the CPA value).
1.2. History interpretation errors
The function of Past Positions/History or Afterglow/Trails could be used for target past movement presentation. This function should
always be used in True motion to targets' maneuvers detection and evaluation. A common mistake is trying to make such an assessment
when this information is displayed in relative motion. Then there is the problem of "relative motion illusions". With this information,
the navigator can make wrong assessment of the target maneuver and later take wrong decisions about necessary OS maneuvers.
Such assessment is even more difficult or completely impossible when the own ship has executed its own maneuver. Should be
remembered that in this situation, the relative motion of all targets are changed. Then it is difficult to notice at all whether other ships
executed their own maneuvers, let alone try to assess their type and size.

A)
 B)
The difference in the presentation of information about the targets' movement in the past (vectors and history) in the Relative and True
Motion presentation.
This problem is shown in the photos above.
Picture A (left) shows relative vectors and the history of relative motion. On their basis, the user has a problem with assessing the size
and nature of the maneuver. If this situation is misinterpreted, it may conclude that one of the ships changed course to starboard by
about 15-200 and slightly reduced the speed.
Only switching to the true motion information t (photo B) allows a proper maneuver assessment. User could see that the ship changed
course to starboard, but by about 750 and did not reduce its speed.
In both photos, the Trails information is presented in True Motion, which may additionally complicate the target maneuver
interpretation. In the ARPA Atlas 9600, when the type of vectors is changed, the type of target history is also automatically switched
(this information depends on the type of currently displayed vectors).
1.3. The initial tracking phase
The initial tracking phase is highly variable. The stabilization time also depends on the actual weather conditions. Therefore, the
Resolution provides a period during the so-called target movement tendency should be presented (up to 1 minute from the acquisition).
As a rule, the first vector appears within 30-50 seconds after the target acquisition. However, until it is fully stabilized (it may take up
to 3 minutes from the acquisition), it may be less stable. Therefore, the navigator should not make too hasty conclusions as to the
potential target maneuvers. Therefore, to enable proper assessment of the situation, echoes should be acquired earlier.
Another situation is when the target is lost at close-range tracking. Then it should be acquired again as soon as possible.
Do not make decisions based on uncertain information available in the pre-tracking time.
1.4. Own ship maneuvers
The own ship's maneuvers have a negative impact on the tracking process accuracy. Of course, in modern types of radars, these types
of tracking errors are not as visible as in the case of the first devices. However, it should be remembered that the tracking process
becomes less stable compared to the period when the own vessel is moving at a constant course and speed. There is always degradation
in tracking quality. But various types of radars present in this area in a very different way.
In accordance with the recommendations of the IMO Resolution, the tracking system has another 3 minutes to stabilize the tracking
process after the completion of the own vessel's maneuvers.
Unfortunately, such a disturbance (unstable target true vectors change their direction) can often be treated by less experienced navigators
as maneuvers of tracked targets. They can then decide to change their previous intentions. Therefore, one should remember about the
possibility of larger tracking errors occurring during the own ship's maneuvers, and especially carefully observe further behavior of
targets true vectors.
Such additional errors are more important in the situation assessment in restricted visibility. That is why the navigator should determine
own ship maneuver impact on tracking accuracy in good visibility, when it has the possibility of visual observation. For this purpose,
during the own ship maneuver, he should simultaneously observe the behavior of true vectors on the radar screen and visually observe
the tracked ships.
If serious disturbances in the tracking process are visible on the radar screen but maneuvers are not visible in reality, it means that the
tracking process is not very stable during own ship maneuvers. In such a case, the navigator should remember this fact, especially in
restricted visibility, when there is no possibility of visual verification. This should avoid drawing hasty conclusions.
1.5. Trial Target Data
Using the functions available in the radar, the navigator must always be aware of what they refer to.
When navigators are using the Trial function, he must know what type of data is displayed in the CPA and TCPA fields. Are these
values related to the current situation or a situation that will occur only after the planned maneuver is executed? Unfortunately, the
requirements of the Resolution do not clearly specify this, and in practice, various solutions can be found. Of course, in the latter case,
the difference should be clearly indicated.
It should be a good practice to determine what type of data is available before using the Trial function as this may lead to
misinterpretation of the data.
2. The risk of over-trust in ARPA
The IMO points to alert navigators to the problem of over-trust in the data presented on the radar screen.
The assumption that the data calculated by the computer system are always very accurate (without taking into account possible
calculations errors) is common in practice. Unfortunately, this may influence in more risky decisions made by navigators, resulting in
dangerous situations. Navigators often forget that the CPA value (so important in the risk assessment) may be errored. In accordance
with the IMO Resolution requirements, CPA errors may achieve a value up to ± 0.3 NM. Of course, usually, the value of this error does
not reach its maximum values, especially in good weather conditions. Nevertheless, this fact must always be taken into account.
The delays in the presentation of the tracked targets' maneuvers are often forgotten. Due to, the navigator does not observe current target
data (vectors, target data) on the radar screen for maneuvering ship, but data from the past, shifted by min. 30-60 sec. This is especially
important in restricted visibility, when he makes decisions only on the basis of radar data and cannot verify them by visual observation
(e.g., quick course altering detection).
3. The professional experience
Experience in the operation of radar devices, their use and interpretation of information increases while performing the duties of the
watch officer on the bridge. Just completing a radar equipment course will not replace this practice. Of course, it provides a basis that
cannot be ignored. Therefore, the practice of cadets on board is also important in this respect. During it, they should acquire additional
knowledge under the supervision of more experienced officers. In this case, decisions taken by deck assistants may (and should) be
additionally verified by the watch officer supervising their work.
The lack of experience may lead to uncertainty about the assessment correctness and decisions made. That is why the aforementioned
period of the cadet service and participating in sea watches is so important. The self-watchkeeping officer must already make sovereign
decisions. The lack of experience may make him assess the situation longer (longer time to make a decision) but also, he could make
safer decisions (passing ships at a greater distance). Each such effectively made decision increases confidence in competences and
develops certain habits of conduct, especially in typical situations, most often encountered at sea.
On the other hand, professional experience may also contribute to the consolidation of bad habits (routine in proceedings). Excessive
confidence in the infallibility and the routine interpretation of the situation around (without the deeper analysis and the specific
circumstances taken into account) can lead to dangerous situations. The reason may be, for example, a delay in an anti-collision
maneuver execution, or a false conviction about opposite ship intentions.
Radar picture stabilization modes (ground or sea stabilization). The use of electronic radar maps and navigation lines.
1. Radar picture stabilization modes
Radars with automatic tracking should allow to use two types of true motion stabilization: ground and sea.
As a result, the navigator is able to both assess: the risk of collision assessment (at sea stabilization) and the use of information about
the ship drift into safe navigation (ground stabilization data). It should be noted that the AIS information does not provide such
possibility, where only full information about the ground stabilized data is available (COG, SOG values are transmitted).
Of course, it should also be remembered that the type of stabilization affects only the information of true motion and does not affect the
relative motion data (relative vectors, CPA and TCPA).
1.1. IMO.823(19) Resolution requirements
First requirements for radar picture stabilization modes appeared in Resolution IMO.823 (19) in 1995. It indicates possible sources of
information that can be used to obtain it (e.g., Doppler log, GPS, fixed object tracking). It was also indicated that it is necessary to use
the information about the vessel's movement through the water in the first. The type of stabilization used should be clearly indicated so
that the user has no problems with its interpretation.
The requirements of the Resolution are as follows:
ARPA should enable radar picture stabilization in sea and ground modes.
Log and other speed indicators should be enable to provide information about own vessel's speed through the water forward and astern.
The bottom-stabilized inputs can be provided from a log, an electronic positioning system if the accuracy of the velocity measurement
is in accordance with the requirements of Resolution A.824 (19) or based on the fixed target tracking.
The type of input data and the stabilization used should be displayed on the screen.
1.2. MSC.192(79) Resolution requirements
The requirements of MSC.192(79) Resolution practically maintained the requirements for providing both types of stabilization modes.
It is true that in the section on this issue itself, there are no clearly indicated sources of information, such requirements are found in other
places (e.g., tracking a fixed target, GPS/DGPS). Of course, this reduces the legibility of the requirements in this regard but does not
change their essence.
The requirements of the Resolution are as follows:
Ground and Sea stabilization modes should be provided.
The stabilization mode and stabilization source should be clearly indicated.
The source of own ships’ speed should be indicated and provided by a sensor approved in accordance with the requirements of the
Organization for the relevant stabilization mode.
1.3. Characteristics of the discussed navigational situation
Only water-stabilized data should be used when the type of situation is assessing (e.g., ships on opposite or intersecting courses) and
anticollision maneuvers planning.
Differences in the presentation information and its interpretation are presented on the example of a simple situation shown below.
 The characteristics of the navigational situation.
In the present situation it is shown schematically ship shapes and their actual routes resulting from the current impact (direction 0900,
speed 5 kn).
In this situation three targets are observed (apart the own ship):
o TRGT 1 - drifting ship (the ship orientation according to wind and waves direction).
 o TRGT 2 - ship on 1950 course and 10 kn speed;
o TRGT 3 - fixed target (buoy).
The own ship is steering 0000 at 10 kn speed.
Large differences between COG and heading (for OS and targets) result from the relation of true speed and current strength.
1.4. Interpretation - sea stabilization mode
Echoes were acquired and tracking process was stabilized. Calculated target data are presented by displayed true vectors and their
reports.
With this type of presentation (sea stabilization), it can be assumed (of course, remembering about possible tracking errors) that these
data can be used to proper interpretation of the situation type arise between ships in good visibility (crossing situation between give-
way and stand-on vessels, head-on situation or overtaking) or the expected maneuver of the target in restricted visibility.
 True vectors - sea stabilization mode
It should be remembered that for drifting vessel calculated true speed value will be equal to or close to zero (the permissible error in
calculating the tracked target speed value is ±0.5 kn - MSC.192(79) Resolution). Therefore, the calculated true course will be very
unstable and should not be taken into account in the interpretation and decision process. Such an object should be considered as fixed
target.
Moving target's data (TRGT 2) are calculated accurately.
With a constant object, A true vector will appear for fixed target (TRGT 3) with the direction opposite to the actual current direction
and the length resulting from the current speed. In order to determine the current direction and speed, you there is necessary to change
the direction presented by this vector by 1800 (at sea stabilization).
1.5. Interpretation - ground stabilization mode
When ground stabilization mode is achieved (e.g., by indicating a fixed target - the Reference Target function), the direction and length
of the presented true vectors and data in target data reports are changed. The indicated echo of a fixed target was marked on the screen
(R1 symbol).
 True vectors - ground stabilization.
In this type of presentation, true vectors must not be treated as ships' headings.
The hull of drifting ship (TRGT 1) can be directed freely, mainly due to the wave and wind direction.
The calculated course for a moving vessel (TRGT 2) differs by 250 from the actual heading. This could lead to a misinterpretation of
the situation in clear visibility that it is a give-way vessel when in fact it is a stand-on vessel (true is the situation in sea stabilization
mode). The avoidance rules do not concern the directions of movement above the bottom but the mutual positioning of ships (visibility
of mastheads, sidelights, and stern lights).
The fixed target (TRGT 3) has a true vector of zero in this type of stabilization.
Such information (ground stabilization vectors) must also not be used for planning anti-collision maneuvers (e.g. using the TRIAL). In
this situation, it is necessary to return earlier to sea stabilization.
This type of stabilization enables easy assessment of the ship's drift angle (the angle between the Own Ship true vector and heading line)
and control the ship's movement along a previously planned route.
1.6. Ground stabilization use
The main advantages of ground stabilization mode use are:
o better fixed target identification;
o OS COG/SOG information;
o the possibility of reference/fixed target data (CPA value) use for OS track monitoring;
o barrier position fixing relative to fixed and coast target;
o the position of true radar maps stabilization relative to coast;
o the Anchor Watch use.

2. The Anchor Watch

The Anchor Watch function is not mandatory. It can be used to monitor the anchoring position.
In radars, it can be associated with a fixed Target tracking function (indicated as a reference target for drift calculation). When the
function is turned on, the base position of such echo is remembered (in relation to the OS radar antenna). Then, the shift of the tracked
target's position relative to the base position is calculated. This solution was used, for example, in Kelvin Hughes ARPA devices.
It is known that a vessel at anchor (especially the position of the radar antenna) moves as a result of the vessel's bending due to weather
conditions or changing the direction of tidal currents. During this time, the relative position of the tracked echo (change in bearing and
distance) measured in relation to the radar antenna will change. If this change is greater than assumed (Anchor Limit), Anchor Watch
Warning will be triggered.
Therefore, it is important to properly define the value of the anchor watch limit, which should be selected depending on the weather
conditions, the proximity of navigational hazards, or other ships at anchor. Of course, the choice of such a value depends on the
possibilities available in a used model of radar.
When alarm was activated, the navigator must determine the reasons for its activation. Mandatory should check that the anchor holds,
or maybe he should take appropriate action to prevent of anchor dragging.
3. Radar maps/ navigational lines
At present, the user can create simple radar maps by drawing lines and inserting symbols on the radar screen. The set of available line
types and symbols used is an individual feature of the specific radar.
It should be possible to save them and then display them on the screen at any time selected by the navigator.
Of course, such maps should not be confused with the electronic charts (ENC), of which selected layers should also be possible to
display on the radar screen.
As the created radar maps are not of an official nature, they should be treated only as an aid in better radar picture interpretation.
Therefore, they should not be too extensive so as not to mask the echoes on the screen.
Such maps should be created in advance and only displayed (loaded) on the screen when the vessel is crossing the area for which they
were created. The navigator certainly does not have time to create a new map during the watch, especially in the coastal area.
True motion maps are of greater importance as aids that can be used for this purpose. They can be created in two operating modes:
o based on the relative position of objects in the area (based on mutual bearings and distances);
o based on the geographical coordinates of points/lines entered into the system.
In the first case, after displaying the map, it will always be necessary to position it in relation to fixed targets and land, and then to turn
on ground stabilization mode.
In the second case, it is necessary to use the own vessel's current position data (switching on GPS/DGPS). If such information is incorrect,
the map may be invisible on the screen (it will be displayed outside the radar's operating range). In this case, the map will be stabilized
automatically.
3.1. MSC.192(79) Resolution requirements
According to MSC.192(79) Resolution:
o it should be possible for the user to manually create and change, save, load, and display simple maps/navigation
lines/routes referenced to own ship or a geographical position. It should
o be possible to remove the display of this data by a simple operator action.
o the maps/navigation lines/routes may consist of lines, symbols, and reference points.
o the appearance of lines, colors and symbols are as defined in SN/Circ.243.
o the maps/navigation lines/route graphics should not significantly degrade the radar information.
o the maps/navigation lines/routes should be retained when the equipment is switched OFF.
o the maps/navigation lines/route data should be transferable whenever a relevant equipment module is replaced.
3.2. Radar maps use
As mentioned before, such simple maps displayed on the radar screen should facilitate the radar picture interpretation, especially in
coastal navigation. In the situation shown below (TSS area), the navigator may have difficulty in properly identification of some echoes
visible on the screen.
 An example of the radar picture showing the area covering the TSS.

Of course, due to the characteristic location and size of the echoes, it is easy to identify some buoy echoes. However, in the case of
another one’s navigator can have doubts.
Echoes acquisition and displaying true vectors also makes echo identification easier and let to determine whether there is a current ior
not (short vectors at the buoy echoes).

The true vectors presentation on radar screen.

Placing a previously created radar map and its correct positioning further facilitates the interpretation. It should be remembered to use
ground stabilization mode when such type maps are used. Otherwise, the map will move in relation to the echoes of fixed targets,
which after some time may lead to errors in interpretation and to make wrong decisions in choosing the necessary maneuvers.

The radar map use (sea stabilization mode)

Ground stabilization mode used.
ARPA, AIS & ECDIS cooperation
1. Introduction
Marine radars are used in association/combination with other navigation devices required on the bridge, such as aids for automated
tracking, ARPA, AIS, ECDIS and others.
The target data may be obtained in the radar echo tracking process or as information obtained from the AIS system.
As far as practicable, the user interface and format of the data used, displayed, AIS indications and tracking information should be
logical (consistent).
2. General requirements
Reported targets provided by the AIS may be filtered according to user-defined parameters.
Targets may be sleeping or may be activated.
Activated targets are treated in a similar way to radar tracked targets.

Source: MSC.192(79) Resolution

3. AIS Target Capacity
In addition to the requirements for radar tracking, it should be possible to display and provide full presentation functionality for a
minimum number of sleeping and activated AIS targets according to Table 1. There should be an indication when the capacity of
processing/display of AIS targets is about to be exceeded.
Source: MSC.192(79) Resolution
4. Filtering of AIS Sleeping Targets
To reduce display clutter, a means to filter the presentation of sleeping AIS targets should be provided, together with an indication of
the filter status. (e.g., by target range, CPA/TCPA or AIS target class A/B, etc.).
It should not be possible to remove individual AIS targets from the display.

Source: MSC.192(79) Resolution

5. Activation of AIS Targets
A means to activate a sleeping AIS target and to deactivate an activated AIS target should be provided.
If zones for the automatic activation of AIS targets are provided, they should be the same as for automatic radar target acquisition.
In addition, sleeping AIS targets may be automatically activated when meeting user defined parameters (e.g., target range, CPA/TCPA
or AIS target class A/B).
Source: MSC.192(79) Resolution
6. AIS Presentation Status

Source: MSC.192(79) Resolution

7. AIS Graphical Presentation
Targets should be presented with their relevant symbols according to the performance standards for the Presentation of Navigation-
related Information on Shipborne Navigational Displays adopted by the Organization and SN/Circ.243.
AIS targets that are displayed should be presented as sleeping targets by default.
The course and speed of a tracked radar target or reported AIS target should be indicated by a predicted motion vector. The vector time
should be adjustable and valid for presentation of any target regardless of its source.
A permanent indication of vector mode, time and stabilization should be provided.
The consistent common reference point (CCRP) should be used for the alignment of tracked radar and AIS symbols with other
information on the same display.
On large scale/low range displays, a means to present the true scale outline of an activated AIS target should be provided. It should be
possible to display the past track of activated targets.

Source: MSC.192(79) Resolution

8. AIS and Radar Target Data
It should be possible to select any tracked radar or AIS target for the alphanumeric display of its data. A target selected for the display
of its alphanumeric information should be identified by the relevant symbol. If more than one target is selected for data display, the
relevant symbols and the corresponding data should be clearly identified. There should be a clear indication to show that the target data
is derived from radar or from AIS.
For each selected tracked radar target, the following data should be presented in alphanumeric form:
o source(s) of data,
o actual range of target,
o actual bearing of target,
o predicted target range at the closest point of approach (CPA),
o predicted time to CPA (TCPA),
o true course of target,
o true speed of target.
For each selected AIS target the following data should be presented in alphanumeric form:
o source of data,
o ship's identification,
o navigational status,
o position where available and its quality,
o range,
o bearing,
o COG,
o SOG,
o CPA and TCPA.
o target heading and reported rate of turn should also be made available.
Additional target information should be provided on request.
If the received AIS information is incomplete, the absent information should be clearly indicated as "missing" within the target data
field.
The data should be displayed and continually updated, until another target is selected for data display or until the window is closed.
Means should be provided to present own ship AIS data on request.

Source: MSC.192(79) Resolution

9. AIS and Radar Target Association
An automatic target association function based on harmonized criteria avoids the presentation of two target symbols for the same
physical target.
If the target data from AIS and radar tracking are both available and if the association criteria (e.g., position, motion) are fulfilled such
that the AIS and radar information are considered as one physical target, then as a default condition, the activated AIS target symbol
and the alphanumeric AIS target data should be automatically selected and displayed.
The user should have the option to change the default condition to the display of tracked radar targets and should be permitted to select
either radar tracking or AIS alphanumeric data.
For an associated target, if the AIS and radar information become sufficiently different, the AIS and radar information should be
considered as two distinct targets and one activated AIS target and one tracked radar target should be displayed. No alarm should be
raised
10. The Display of Charts
The radar system may provide the means to display ENC and other vector chart information within the operational display area to
provide continuous and real-time position monitoring. It should be possible to remove the display of chart data by a single operator
action.
The ENC information should be the primary source of information and should comply with IHO relevant standards. Status of other
information should be identified with a permanent indication. Source and update information should be made available.
As a minimum, the elements of the ECDIS Standard Display should be made available for individual selection by category or layer, but
not as individual objects.
The chart information should use the same reference and co-ordinate criteria as the radar/AIS, including datum, scale, orientation, CCRP
and stabilization mode.
The display of radar information should have priority. Chart information should be displayed such that radar information is not
substantially masked, obscured, or degraded. Chart information should be clearly perceptible as such.
A malfunction of the source of chart data should not affect the operation of the radar/AIS system.
Symbols and colors should comply with the performance standards for the Presentation of Navigation-related Information on Shipborne
Navigational Displays adopted by the Organization (SN/Circ.243).
IMO requirements. Legal bases regulating the ARPA use onboard.
1. Resolution MSC. 192(79)
Resolution MSC.192(79) recalling Article 28(b) of the Convention on the International Maritime Organization concerning the functions
of the Committee. Also recalling Resolution A.886(21) by which the Assembly resolved that the
functions of adopting performance standards and technical specifications, as well as amendments thereto, shall be performed by the
Maritime Safety Committee on behalf of the Organization.
In the following, it is noted that Resolutions A.222 (VII), A.278 (VIII), A.477 (XII), MSC.64 (67), annex 4, A.820 (19) and A. 823 (19)
have not been canceled and contain the operational requirements applicable to marine radars manufactured and installed on board in the
past.
It should also be remembered that at present marine radars are not installed on ships as devices working separately/independently but
are used in integration/connection with other navigational equipment such as AIS or ECDIS.
As their production is carried out by many companies producing radar devices available on various types of vessels and they are used
by navigators of various professional experience, there is a need to standardize general and specific standards of marine radars regarding
the display and presentation of information related to navigation. This Resolution refers to such requirements.
The basic set of requirements for radar devices is included in the Annex. These requirements apply to radar devices installed on board
on or after 1 July 2008. Of course, these are the minimum requirements, and therefore radar devices with greater capabilities could be
often found.
2. Annex
The Annex contains the Revised Recommendations of Performance Standards for Radar Equipment. A large part of these requirements
has already been presented during the previous lectures, therefore here we will only present the general scope of requirements and the
most important issues not yet presented.
The content of the Annex includes the following chapters:
1. SCOPE OF EQUIPMENT
2. APPLICATION OF THESE STANDARDS
 3. REFERENCES (content in Appendix 1)
4. DEFINITIONS (content in Appendix 2)
5. OPERATIONAL REQUIREMENTS FOR THE RADAR SYSTEM
6. ERGONOMIC CRITERIA
7. DESIGN AND INSTALLATION
8. INTERFACING
9. BACKUP AND FALLBACK ARRANGEMENTS
The full text of the Resolution MSC.192 (79) together with the Annex and Annexes is located:
https://e.am.szczecin.pl/pluginfile.php/49331/mod_book/chapter/2987/MSC.192%2879%29ang.pdf
2.1. SCOPE OF EQUIPMENT
This chapter describes the main tasks for radar devices.
The radar equipment should assist in safe navigation and in avoiding collision by providing an indication, in relation to own ship, of the
position of other surface craft, obstructions and hazards, navigation objects and shorelines.
Radar should provide the integration and display of radar video, target tracking information, positional data derived from own ship’s
position (EPFS) and geo referenced data.
The integration and display of AIS information should be provided to complement radar. The capability of displaying selected parts of
Electronic Navigation Charts and other vector chart information may be provided to aid navigation and for position monitoring.
The radar, combined with other sensor or reported information (e.g., AIS), should improve the safety of navigation by assisting in the
efficient navigation of ships and protection of the environment by satisfying the following functional requirements:
o in coastal navigation and harbor approaches, by giving a clear indication of land and other fixed hazards;
o as a means to provide an enhanced traffic image and improved situation awareness;
o in a ship-to-ship mode for aiding collision avoidance of both detected and reported hazards;
 o in the detection of small floating and fixed hazards, for collision avoidance and the safety of own ship;
o in the detection of floating and fixed aids to navigation.
2.2. APPLICATION OF THESE STANDARDS
These Performance Standards should apply to all shipborne radar installations, used in any configuration, mandated by the 1974 SOLAS
Convention, as amended, independent of the:
o type of ship.
o frequency band in use; and
o type of display.
providing that no special requirements are specified in Table 1 and that additional requirements for specific classes of ships (in
accordance with SOLAS chapters V and X) are met.
The radar installation, in addition to meeting the general requirements as set out in Resolution A.694(17), should comply with the
following performance standards.
Close interaction between different navigational equipment and systems, makes it essential to consider these standards in association
with other relevant IMO standards.
2.3. REFERENCES
Acts referenced in the resolution are listed in Annex 1.
These include documents specifying requirements for radar devices installed in the past and devices cooperating with the radar system
(e.g., AIS, ECDIS, speed and course indicators). IEC documents specifying methods of testing radar equipment before it is allowed to
operate on board are also indicated.
2.4. DEFINITIONS
Definitions are in appendix 2.
2.5. OPERATIONAL REQUIREMENTS FOR THE RADAR SYSTEM
This part of the Annex contains the main performance requirements for radar systems.
The design and performance of the radar should be based on user requirements and up-to-date navigational technology. It should provide
effective target detection within the safety-relevant environment surrounding own ship and should permit fast and easy situation
evaluation.
The main subsections of this part cover the following topics:
o Frequency.
o Radar Range and Bearing Accuracy.
o Detection Performance and Anti-clutter Functions.
o Minimum Range.
o Discrimination.
o Roll and Pitch.
o Radar Performance Optimization and Tuning.
o Radar Availability.
o Radar Measurements - CCRP.
o Display Range Scales.
o Fixed Range Rings
o Variable Range Markers.
o Bearing Scale.
o Heading Line.
o Electronic Bearing Lines.
o Parallel Index lines.
o User Cursor.
o Azimuth Stabilization.
o Display Mode of the Radar Picture.
 o Off-Centering.
o Ground and Sea Stabilization Modes.
o Target Trails and Past Positions.
o Presentation of Target Information.
o Target Tracking and Acquisition.
o Automatic Identification System - Reported Targets.
o AIS Graphical Presentation.
o AIS and Radar Target Data.
o Operational Alarms.
o AIS and Radar Target Association.
o Trial Maneuver.
o The Display of Maps, Navigation Lines and Routes.
o The Display of Charts.
o Alarms and Indications.
o Integrating Multiple Radars.
2.6. ERGONOMIC CRITERIA
The ergonomic criteria relate to such basic issues as the regulation of the intuitive and simple operation of the radar system.
The control functions may be dedicated hardware, screen accessed or a combination of these; however, the primary control functions
should be dedicated hardware controls or soft keys, with an associated status indication in a consistent and intuitive position.
A set of basic radar functions has also been identified and should be easily and immediately available. They are:
o Radar Standby/RUN,
 o Range scale selection,
o Gain,
o Tuning function (jeśli jest dostępna),
o Anti-clutter rain, Anti-clutter sea,
o AIS function on/off,
o Alarm acknowledge, Cursor,
o EBL/VRM,
o Display brightness,
o Acquisition of radar targets.
The display presentation should comply with the performance standards for the Presentation of Navigation-related Information on
Shipborne Navigational Displays adopted by the Organization.
The operating instructions and manufacturers documentation should be written in a clear and comprehensible manner and should be
available at least in the English language.
The operating instructions should contain a qualified explanation and/or description of information required by the user to operate the
radar system correctly, including:
o appropriate settings for different weather conditions;
o monitoring the radar system’s performance;
o operating in a failure or fall-back situation;
o limitations of the display and tracking process and accuracy, including any delays;
o using heading and SOG/COG information for collision avoidance.
o limitations and conditions of target association.
 o criteria of selection for automatic activation and cancellation of targets;
o methods applied to display AIS targets and any limitations.
o principles underlying the trial maneuver technology, including simulation of own ship’s maneuvering characteristics, if
provided;
o alarms and indications;
o installation requirements as listed under section 7.5.
o radar range and bearing accuracies; and
o any special operation (e.g., tuning) for the detection of SARTs; and
o the role of the CCRP for radar measurements and its specific value.
2.7. DESIGN AND INSTALLATION
This section presents the assumptions for servicing radar systems and the requirements for the characteristics of the display and radar
antenna used, together with the requirement to provide appropriate installation guides.
The designed radar system should ensure ease of use and there should be an object simulation function that can be used in the training
process.
2.8. INTERFACING
The radar system should be capable of receiving the required input information from:
o a gyrocompass or transmitting heading device (THD);
o a speed and distance measuring equipment (SDME);
o an electronic position fixing system (EPFS);
o an Automatic Identification System (AIS); or
o other sensors or networks providing equivalent information acceptable to the Organization.
The radar system should provide an output of the display data for the voyage data recorder (VDR).
The radar should have a bi-directional interface to facilitate communication so that alarms from the radar can be transferred to external
systems and so that audible alarms from the radar can be muted from external systems, the interface should comply with relevant
international standards.
2.9. BACKUP AND FALLBACK ARRANGEMENTS
In the event of partial failures and to maintain minimum basic operation, the fallback arrangements listed below should be provided.
There should be a permanent indication of the failed input information.
The equipment should operate satisfactorily in an unstabilized head-up mode. The equipment should switch automatically to the
unstabilized head up mode within 1 minute after the azimuth stabilization has become ineffective. An indication should be given that
only relative bearing measurements can be used.
A means of manual speed input should be provided, and its use clearly indicated.
The equipment may be operated with course and speed through the water information.
The overlay of chart data and geographically referenced maps should be disabled if only a single Reference Target is defined and used,
or the position is manually entered.
In the absence of radar signals, the equipment should display target information based on AIS data. A frozen radar picture should not
be displayed. In the absence of AIS signals, the equipment should display the radar video and target database.
The equipment should be capable of operating equivalent to a stand-alone system.
3. Appendix 1 - References
1. IMO SOLAS - chapters IV, V and X Carriage rules.
2. IMO resolution A.278(VII) - Supplement to the recommendation on PS for navigational radar equipment.
3. IMO resolution A.424(XI) - Performance standards for gyrocompasses.
4. IMO resolution A.477(XII) - Performance standards for radar equipment.
5. IMO resolution A.694(17) - General Requirements for ship borne radio equipment forming part of the global maritime distress
and safety system and for electronically navigational aids.
6. IMO resolution A.817(19) - as amended Performance Standards for ECDIS.
7. IMO resolution A.821(19) - Performance standards for gyrocompasses for high-speed craft.
8. IMO resolution A.824(19) - Performance standards for devices to indicate speed and distance.
9. IMO resolution MSC.86(70) - Performance standards for INS.
10. IMO resolution MSC.64(67) - Recommendations on new and amended performance standards (Annex 2 revised by
MSC.114(73)).
11. IMO resolution MSC.112(73) - Revised performance standards for ship borne global positioning (GPS) receiver equipment.
12. IMO resolution MSC.114(73) - Revised performance standards for ship borne DGPS and DGLONASS maritime radio beacon
receiver equipment.
13. IMO resolution MSC.116(73) - Performance standards for marine transmitting heading devices (THD).
14. IMO MSC/Circ.982 - Guidelines on ergonomic criteria for bridge equipment and layout.
15. IHO S-52 appendix 2 - Color and symbol specification for ECDIS.
16. IEC 62388 - Radar Test Standard (replacing 60872 and 60936 series of test standards).
17. IEC 60945 - Maritime navigation and radio communication equipment and systems - General requirements - Methods of testing
and required test results.
18. IEC 61162 Maritime navigation and radio communication equipment and systems – Digital interfaces.
19. IEC 61174 - Maritime navigation and radio communication equipment and systems – Electronic chart display and information
system (ECDIS) - Operational and performance requirements, methods of testing and required test results.
20. IEC 62288 Presentation and display of navigation information.
21. ISO 9000 (all parts) Quality management/assurance standards.
4. Appendix 2 - Definitions
Radar systems testing procedures. Malfunction localization.
1. Assumptions for servicing and testing
According to the Resolution, the radar system should enable simple device diagnostics, reception of a specific type of input signals and
delivery of output signals (e.g., to VDR devices). These requirements are contained in chapters 7, 8 and 9.
During normal operation, tests of input signals and basic elements of the system are performed, both at the stage of switching on and its
operation. Any failure, malfunction or loss of signal indications should be reported by the appropriate error message. Of course, the
signaling methods depend on the specifics of device. It can be displayed with a suggestion to change the settings to ensure correct
operation or by code of damage displaying.
Therefore, it is important to familiarize the user with the rules of testing and servicing devices contained in a manual. The user should
follow the service suggestions it contains and perform the suggested tests periodically.
Of course, the possibility of self-repairing the radar in ship conditions is very limited (most often it comes down to replacing fuses), but
the tests performed will help in obtaining additional information that may be useful when contacting the service.
Should not be forgotten either carrying out the periodic check of the ventilation elements and the degree of contamination of equipment
inside the case. This is particularly important due to the operating conditions of marine radars, such as humidity, dust, or vibration.
Periodic cleaning of the fans will allow to maintain proper operating temperature conditions, which extends the period of their failure-
free operation.
2. Training
According to sub-clause 7.6.2 of Resolution MSC.192 (79), the facility simulation function used in training should be available.
Such a solution should ensure the possibility to generate a specific navigational situation allowing the use of basic radar functions in a
case where it is not possible to observe the actual true situation (e.g., when the ship is moored in a port). This simulation can be used
both for user training or tracking systems testing.
This approach was used by Kelvin Hughes and Norcontrol from the very beginning. It was possible to generate on the screen one or
more selected navigational situations of various difficulty levels.
In the case of the KH company, it was one situation (shown in the figure below) that made it possible to test the device (the test time
was 60 minutes, and during this test the simulated echoes moved according to the diagram in the manual). During the simulation, the
own ship was constantly moving at course 0000 and speed of 10 knots (without the possibility of changing these parameters).

Test situation used by KH.

Source: KH ARPA user manuals
In the case of Norcontrol products, it was possible to simulate as many as 4 different situations, which, however, were used for testing
to a very limited extent (automatic acquisition). In the case of this company was available a rich set of predefined tests (available to the
user), allowing accurate testing devices. For these simulations, there was also the possibility of Own Ship maneuvering.
3. Defaults parameters
Many devices allow you to configure the so-called Defaults parameters, i.e., configuration parameters used when starting the device.
This speeds up the process of enabling it at user-preferred settings.
It can be found solutions for their configuration by changing the settings in the set of option available after selecting a specific menu
(e.g., the set used in the ARPA KH300 device). After selecting specific values preferred by the user, such data should be saved in the
system.
 Defaults Parameters in KH 3000.
Source: ARPA Manual - KH 3000.
Another solution used by this company (ARPA NUCLEUS 6000A) is the ability to save a set of defaults parameters after prior
radar/ARPA configuration and selecting the appropriate command to save such configuration.
In many modern devices, the saving of configuration parameters may take place at the moment of switching off the device. In this case,
it will start on power-up with the same configuration. Such an approach results from the fact that the radars are usually turned on under
similar conditions as it was turned off (e.g., the ship is berthed in the port).
4. Installation parameters
Due to the fact that the radar uses information from other devices (log, gyrocompass, GPS), the signals obtained from them must be
properly configured. Therefore, you should save such a copy of these parameters for the purpose of their possible recovery when they
are deleted or changed as a result of a failure. In each case of change, one should proceed very carefully as evidenced by the message
generated on the screen in the case of KH devices.
 Installation Menu - KH 3000.
Source: ARPA Manual KH 3000
5. Failures
In the event of partial failures and to maintain minimum basic operation, the fallback arrangements should be provided. There should
be a permanent indication of the failed input information.
In the event of obtaining information about improper operation of the device or the occurrence of a defect, the operator should take
certain actions. It may be necessary to reconfigure the radar's cooperation with other devices (change of the information source) or to
perform certain tests.
Radar device testing can be performed on the basis of the algorithms included in the operating/technical manuals. Examples of such
algorithms are presented below.
 Selected examples of fault location algorithms in KH and Norcontrol devices.
When such tests are performed, all information arising during the tests should be recorded. Unfortunately, most often the final indication
of such an algorithm is the need to call the service in order to repair the damaged device.
Ships in restricted visibility
1. Definition
The term “restricted visibility” means any condition in which visibility is restricted by fog, mist, falling snow, heavy rainstorms,
sandstorms or any other similar causes.
There are no 'stand-on' or 'give-way' vessels in restricted visibility!!!
2. Regulation related to restricted visibility
The following regulations apply in and near low visibility conditions:
o Part A, Rule 2: Responsibility.
o Part B, Section I: Rules 4-10 (Rules in this section apply in any condition of visibility).
o Part B, Section III: Rule 19 (Conduct of vessels in restricted visibility).
o Part C, Rule 35 (Sound signals in restricted visibility).
The following rules take on special significance in restricted visibility condition:
o Look-out (Rule 5).
o Safe speed (Rule 6).
o Risk of collision (Rule 7).
o Action to avoid collision (Rule 8).
3. Regulations not valid for reduced visibility
Regulations do not apply to ships that cannot see each other:
o Part B, section II (vessels in sight of one another – especially Rules 12, 15, 17).
o Maneuvering and warning signals (Rule 34).
4. Obligation to use radar
The obligation to use radar results from the following rules:
o Responsibility (Rule 2a).
o Look-out (Rule 5).
o Risk of collision (Rule 7b).
5. Rule 19
Conduct of vessels in restricted visibility.
(a). This Rule applies to vessels not in sight of one another when navigating in or near an area of restricted visibility.
(b). Every vessel shall proceed at a safe speed adapted to the prevailing circumstances and conditions of restricted visibility. A power-
driven vessel shall have her engines ready for immediate maneuver.
(c). Every vessel shall have due regard to the prevailing circumstances and conditions of restricted visibility when complying with the
Rules of section I of this part.
(d). A vessel which detects by radar alone the presence of another vessel shall determine if a close-quarters situation is developing and/or
risk of collision exists. If so, she shall take avoiding action in ample time, provided that when such action consists of an alteration of
course, so far as possible the following shall be avoided:
(i). an alteration of course to port for a vessel forward of the beam, other than for a vessel being overtaken;
(ii). an alteration of course towards a vessel abeam or abaft the beam.
(e). Except where it has been determined that a risk of collision does not exist, every vessel which hears apparently forward of her
beam the fog signal of another vessel, or which cannot avoid a close-quarters situation with another vessel forward of her beam, shall
reduce her speed to the minimum at which she can be kept on her course. She shall, if necessary, take all her way off and in any event
navigate with extreme caution until danger of collision is over.
The Course Alteration Diagram provides recommendations for the anti-collision maneuver in more detailed form. It is based on the
assumption that the observed ships' echoes are approaching that they cause a close-quarters situation. The presented rules should be
treated only as suggestions, necessarily taking into account the current meeting conditions and circumstances!
 Course Alteration Diagram for use in Avoiding a Vessel Detected by Radar.
Source: https://seamanship.ie/col-regs-rule-19-conduct-of-vessels-in-restricted-visibility/
6. Rule 35
Sound signals in restricted visibility.
In or near an area of restricted visibility, whether by day or night, the signals prescribed in this Rule shall be used as follows:
(a). A power-driven vessel making way through the water shall sound at intervals of not more than 2 minutes one prolonged blast.
(b). A power-driven vessel underway but stopped and making no way through the water shall sound at intervals of not more than
2 minutes two prolonged blasts in succession with an interval of about 2 seconds between them.
(c). A vessel not under command, a vessel restricted in her ability to maneuver, a vessel constrained by her draught, a sailing
vessel, a vessel engaged in fishing a vessel engaged in towing or pushing another vessel shall, instead of the signals prescribed in
paragraphs (a) or (b) of this Rule, sound at intervals of not more than 2 minutes three blasts in succession, namely one prolonged
followed by two short blasts.
(d). A vessel engaged in fishing, when at anchor, a vessel restricted in her ability to maneuver when carrying out her work at
anchor, shall instead of the signals prescribed in paragraph (g) of this Rule sound the signal prescribed in paragraph (c) of this Rule.
(e). A vessel towed or if more than one vessel is towed the last vessel of the tow, if manned, shall at intervals of not more than 2
minutes sound four blasts in succession, namely one prolonged followed by three short blasts. When practicable, this signal shall be
made immediately after the signal made by the towing vessel.
(f). When a pushing vessel and a vessel being pushed ahead are rigidly connected in a composite unit they shall be regarded as a
power-driven vessel and shall give the signals prescribed in paragraphs (a) or (b) of this Rule.
(g). A vessel at anchor shall at intervals of not more than one minute ring the bell rapidly for about 5 seconds. In a vessel of 100 meters
or more in length the bell shall be sounded in the forepart of the vessel and immediately after the ringing of the bell the gong shall be
sounded rapidly for about 5 seconds in the after part of the vessel. A vessel at anchor may in addition sound three blasts in succession,
namely one short, one prolonged and one short blast, to give warning of her position and of the possibility of collision to an approaching
vessel.
(h). A vessel aground shall give the bell signal and if required the gong signal prescribed in paragraph (g) of this Rule and shall, in
addition, give three separate and distinct strokes on the bell immediately before and after the rapid ringing of the bell. A vessel aground
may in addition sound an appropriate whistle signal.
(i). A vessel of 12 meters or more but less than 20 meters in length shall not be obliged to give the bell signals prescribed in paragraphs
(g) and (h) of this Rule. However, if she does not, she shall make some other efficient sound signal at intervals of not more than 2
minutes.
(j). A vessel of less than 12 meters in length shall not be obliged to give the above-mentioned signals but, if she does not, shall make
some other efficient sound signal at intervals of not more than 2 minutes.
(k). A pilot vessel when engaged on pilotage duty may in addition to the signals prescribed in paragraphs (a), (b) or (g) of this Rule
sound an identity signal consisting of four short blasts.