<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="https://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Transport Research International Documentation (TRID)</title>
    <link>https://trid.trb.org/</link>
    <atom:link href="https://trid.trb.org/Record/RSS?s=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" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
    <description></description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <copyright>Copyright © 2026. National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.</copyright>
    <docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
    <managingEditor>tris-trb@nas.edu (Bill McLeod)</managingEditor>
    <webMaster>tris-trb@nas.edu (Bill McLeod)</webMaster>
    
    <item>
      <title>FUNDAMENTAL CONCEPT OF AUTOMATED WATCHING</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/158252</link>
      <description><![CDATA[No Abstract.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 21 May 1981 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/158252</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>RULES FOR BUILDING AND CLASSING STEEL VESSELS</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/90763</link>
      <description><![CDATA[These rules have been published annually since 1890, and the 1979 edition covers steel vessels of 61 m and over in length, intended for unrestricted ocean service.  Topics covered include requirements for a quality assurance programme for rolled steel, requirements for refrigerated cargo containers, and a guide to automatic bridge control integrated propulsion systems.  In addition, this year's volume contains major modifications to requirements for preheat and postweld treatment for plates, tubes, and piping.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 15 Aug 1979 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/90763</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>AN AT-SEA COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF DECK OFFICER PERFORMANCE WITH AND WITHOUT AUTOMATED INFORMATION DISPLAYS</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/81964</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The data reported in this paper provide documentation of the performance of deck officers using both basic radar equipment and automated collision avoidance systems.  As a part of a continuing Maritime Administration study directed toward the design of a standardized bridge, comparative performance and workload were evaluated over several months aboard vessels of different types operating over several trade routes.  Some of the conclusions reached with regard to the use of automated collision avoidance systems include: (1) the range at which approaching ships are detected as threats was doubled, (2) the closest point of approach resulting from evasive maneuvering was doubled, (3) the deck officer's workload was reduced by factors of two to four depending upon the situation, (4) saturation workloads for officer in critical maneuvering situations were eliminated, (5) difficult analytical tasks were replaced by short duration detection tasks, and (6) no deterioration either in the deck officer's vigilance of in his use of readily discernible course changes was noted.  Use of automation equipment which complements rather than replaces operating personnel appears to contribute to both the safety and efficiency of ship operations in the case of collision avoidance equipment.  This concept may be applicable to other areas of ship operations.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 25 Apr 1979 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/81964</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>AN EVALUATION OF ADVANCED BRIDGE DISPLAYS FOR DESIGN STANDARDIZATION</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/78152</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Ship operators are selectively installing a wide variety of advanced bridge equipment, primarily to automate the functional areas of collision avoidance and navigation. While the installation of these equipments has resulted in proven gains in the area of safety, the variety of equipments and lack of standardization have created crew training and safety problems.  As equipment manufacturers address themselves to ship control displays for use in restricted or pilot waters, similar problems will potentially develop.  The Maritime Administration has undertaken a program addressing the development of a "standardized bridge" as an attempt to resolve the proliferation of diverse ship control displays and their attendant adverse effects on maritime safety.  Phase I of the program collected data at sea to define deck officer information requirements and the utilization of automated bridge systems.  This paper addresses some of the results of Phase II of the program, which included simulator evaluation of alternate ship control displays as applied to pilotage and navigation in three New York Harbor areas. Subjects were licensed pilots and ship masters.  Displays evaluated included: collision avoidance radar, predictor steering, transponder information, and computer-generated navigation aids superimposed over radar.  From the analysis of an encompassing array of measures ranging from ship control stability to display usage behaviors, significant differences were found across displays.  Of particular significance were gains in ship control performance by pilots when they used a combined predictor steering and collision avoidance display.  Pilots who are licensed for the simulated area, but who usually work in another area demonstrated an even greater benefit with the addition of selected chart data on the same display.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Sat, 03 Feb 1979 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/78152</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>AN AUTOMATED STANDARDIZED BRIDGE DESIGN FOR THE U.S. MERCHANT MARINE--VOLUME I--EXECUTIVE SUMMARY</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/71349</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The report is an executive summary of Phase I of a MarAd sponsored study devoted to the development of a Standardized Bridge.  An initial objective was to establish the relative advantages of bridges equipped with automated collision avoidance displays (CAS) over traditionally equipped bridges in order to determine the worth of their incorporation in a standardized design.  At-sea data were collected on a balanced sample of ships equipped with CAS and those traditionally equipped.  Results showed a doubling of: safe passing distances (1 NM versus 1/2 NM); threat detection ranges (7 NM versus 4 NM); and range at maneuver (4 1/2 NM versus 2 NM); all in favor of the CAS systems. Decreased workloads were also found, allowing more time for decision making.  Design data were developed for a Standardized Bridge based on additional at-sea data.  These data suggest a central console design for a single seated or standing deck officer with options for dual officer manning. Required advanced development of navigation displays was documented for inclusion in the standardized design.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Sat, 19 Aug 1978 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/71349</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>MICRO-ELECTRONICS IN BRIDGE CONTROL SYSTEMS</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/61213</link>
      <description><![CDATA[A lack of flexibility in the electronics of bridge control systems, resulting in a considerable amount of re-design if modifications or additions were required, has been overcome by the micro-processor.  This integrated but not "dedicated" circuit, which receives instructions from a programming unit, can form a building block for a complete automation system, and this type of system is likely to become of great importance for the monitoring and bridge control of main and auxiliary machinery.  The ASEA company markets a system of this type, and the first ships equipped with it are now entering service.  The article describes and discusses this system, which embodies the company's DS-8 units (see MRIS abstract No. 21-157847) using it as an example to illustrate the extent to which micro-electronics can fulfill the requirements of a good bridge-control system.  Order from: BSRA as No. 46,733.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 14 Mar 1978 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/61213</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>THE USE OF COMPUTERS IN SHIPS</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/58363</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Details are given of the IBM Maritime Applications/Bridge System, an integrated navigation system designed to improve the safety and economy of ship operations.  Five programs run concurrently to provide information on Route planning, Position Fixing, Route tracking, Adaptive Autopilot and Collision Assessment.  The complete system consists of an IBM System/7 general purpose computer specially adapted for marine use, a bridge console and a set of programs.  Each of these elements is described.  Order from: BSRA as No. 46,737.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 07 Mar 1978 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/58363</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>ASEA AUTOMATION FOR PRODUCTS CARRIERS</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/53683</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The new range of automatic bridge-control and measuring systems is built up around ASEA's electronic DS-8 programmable signal-processing system, which is designed for initiating and controlling the output of equipment for process control by means of a program stored in a memory. The following standard marine automation systems are available: -Bridge Control Type FAHMS-S-for the remote control of marine Diesel engines with fixed propellers.  It is standardized for all major engine types, and can be adapted to others.  A wide range of functions can be controlled, including start, stop, slowdown, fuel and rpm control, and also fault tracing. Bridge Control Type FAMP-S-similar to the above but for c.p.  propellers; there are two varieties, one controlling on the most favourable combination of rpm and propeller pitch, and the other one maximum rpm.  Alarm and Measuring Type ALSY-8-temperatures, pressures, levels etc. are sensed by analogue transducers and presented on a digital display. Power Plant Control GENA-S-for automatic control of shipboard power plants. Diesel Engine Condition Monitoring Clydet-CM. Propeller Shaft Measuring Torque Meter, Power Meter, and Fuel Rate Meter-the torque meter is based on the torductor torque transducer.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 15 Aug 1977 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/53683</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>AUTOMATED COMMAND RESPONSE VERIFICATION. THE FEASIBILITY OF A MARITIME SAFETY DEVICE EMPLOYING THE AUTOMATED SPEECH TECHNOLOGIES</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/49168</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This report describes the results of a preliminary investigation into the feasibility of enhancing maritime safety by employing the automated speech recognition and generation technologies. An Automated Command Response Verification System was designed to recognize the commands issued by the conning officer, to determine what control response is appropriate to the command, to monitor the ship controls in order to determine if the actual response to the command is correct, and to issue an advisory to the bridge when the control response is incorrect. Recognition of the conning officer's commands is accomplished by means of a voice input preprocessor and speech recognition software. Advisories to the bridge are issued verbally by means of a voice synthesizer and related software. The feasibility of the concept was studied in Logicon's Speech Laboratory which incorporated an additional simulated ship control console and indicators. Results of the study indicate that the concept is technically feasible and that further investigation in either a simulated or real operational environment is warranted.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 19 Jul 1977 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/49168</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>AUTOMATED BRIDGE SYSTEMS</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/26831</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This paper reviews the level of bridge automation that is the current operating practice of Italian ship operators on larger tankers.  Systems described include such advanced equipments as computerized Collision Avoidance, Satellite Navigation and Omega, and Stress Prediction.  Other features include dual gyros, radars, speed sources, and even redundant computers.  The Lolli-Ghetti Integrated Navigation System was designed to meet the operational requirements of today's supertankers and to provide an expansion capability that will meet the requirements of tomorrow.  The final decision was a compromise that involved operational requiremnts, projected requirements, alternate state-of-the-art equipment, conventional bridge equipment packages and economic tradeoffs.  Key system features include: High reliability, provided by redundancy and interswitching of all sensors between two computers; advanced equipments including doppler docking, computerized Omega, and the Collision Avoidance System, and duplication of conventional equipments, including radar, gyrocompasses, and two speed logs.  A final aspect of the design is the selection of computerized capabilities that will provide sufficient capability for today and anticipate expansion in the near future.  This paper reviews the Lolli-Ghetti Integrated Navigation system in depth and then focuses on an alternative system, the Lauro Navigation System.  Finally, the paper projects future maritime system developments.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 01 May 1975 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/26831</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>