Hacker News Reader

Comment by dsr_ | Hacker News Reader

When the ship is not near shore, there's no doubt in my mind that it is safer in the hands of an automated pilot.

It's only when things get crowded and unpredictable -- that is, with lots of non-automated shipping about -- where you will need serious piloting software. I imagine that there will be a long crossover period where ships will set out from a port with a small human crew -- possibly just a pilot and lookouts -- then go autonomously across the ocean to be picked up by another small crew a few hours out from the destination port.

View on HN

Many larger ports require larger ships to use a pilot who is familiar with the port near the coast. See for example http://www.mpa.gov.sg/sites/port_and_shipping/port/pilotage_..., http://www.pla.co.uk/Pilotage/About-the-PLA-s-Pilotage-Servi..., or http://www.loodswezen.nl/en/home/1593/

That system could stay as-is if the normal crew would be automated away.

You'd still need some sort of pilothouse in that situation, which would tend to negate some of the clear-deck design benefits.

There's also the question of who's going to deploy (and untangle) the boarding ladder that pilots use to get aboard vessels. As well as the prospects of hacking that subsystem in order to divert the vessel.

http://fixyt.com/watch?v=bcSCNFJDy6Y

http://fixyt.com/watch?v=UT05TYaQV8w

Well that's easy you do some sort of authenticated deployment, with a system more secure than the one shown.

Watch those videos.

Now design me an automated deployment system which can handle the operating conditions and environment, and respond, effectively, as good or better than a human can.

Consider that your ladder can get snagged, caught, swing in the wind or seas, collect flotsam or jetsam, etc. Things can get very squirrely at sea.

Sometimes humans aren't the best at a specific function, but through processing and manipulation capabilities, including the ability to use and apply multiple other tools, they're the best means for responding to a general case of circumstances which cover a lot of ground.

I'd say specifically this case doesn't seem very safe to me. For example you could have a rope attach to some rod on the boat, then you could use that rope to attach some climbing device. Of course, the rope has to be lowered slowly and the receptacle must be large so there isn't much to miss.

Not hard to imagine something better than jumping to a ladder on the side of the boat to be honest.

Unless the remote piloting can be handed off to the local expert who could be watching from the dock based control room.

It's already standard for a local pilot to go out to large ships and steer them into port. That would work perfectly in this model.

Yeah. Automate it to within a few miles off shore. Then each port maintains a small staff of captains who are ferried out to each ship and brings it to port.

> Then each port maintains a small staff of captains who are ferried out to each ship and brings it to port.

Which is already the case, so this would be a fairly easy transition.

I am quite convinced that many pilot position exist simply because of local regulation. Unions do control a lot of shipping, especially loading and unloading.

You really think computers of this day and age are less capable? We trust them for a lot more risky stuff than piloting a ship at very low speeds.

The article mentioned the drone ships will be piloted remotely.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com