U.S. patent application number 10/696110 was filed with the patent office on 2004-09-30 for method and system for marine vessel tracking system.
Invention is credited to Cline, James Douglas.
Application Number | 20040193367 10/696110 |
Document ID | / |
Family ID | 27558320 |
Filed Date | 2004-09-30 |
United States Patent
Application |
20040193367 |
Kind Code |
A1 |
Cline, James Douglas |
September 30, 2004 |
Method and system for marine vessel tracking system
Abstract
A marine ship tracking system automatically and accurately
monitors ship movements utilizing a limited number of reports from
a marine ship and is easily installed and operated. Ships utilizing
the marine ship tracking system periodically transmit reports to a
remote tracking center. A ship sends a report to the remote
tracking center when there is a significant change in the ship's
movement or position, or if a predetermined amount of time has
elapsed since the ship last sent a report to the remote tracking
center. The report includes current ship information, such as
current position and current movement information. Because the ship
sends a report each time a significant change in movement occurs,
the remote tracking center may accurately extrapolate the position
of the ship between the transmissions of the reports. In this
manner, the remote tracking center may retain an accurate history
of the ship's position and movements at all times.
Inventors: |
Cline, James Douglas;
(Mission Viejo, CA) |
Correspondence
Address: |
KNOBBE MARTENS OLSON & BEAR LLP
2040 MAIN STREET
FOURTEENTH FLOOR
IRVINE
CA
92614
US
|
Family ID: |
27558320 |
Appl. No.: |
10/696110 |
Filed: |
October 29, 2003 |
Related U.S. Patent Documents
|
|
|
|
|
|
Application
Number |
Filing Date |
Patent Number |
|
|
10696110 |
Oct 29, 2003 |
|
|
|
10146436 |
May 14, 2002 |
|
|
|
6658349 |
|
|
|
|
60290793 |
May 14, 2001 |
|
|
|
60299902 |
Jun 21, 2001 |
|
|
|
60301209 |
Jun 27, 2001 |
|
|
|
60330442 |
Oct 17, 2001 |
|
|
|
60357752 |
Feb 14, 2002 |
|
|
|
Current U.S.
Class: |
701/408 ;
340/993 |
Current CPC
Class: |
G08G 3/00 20130101; G06Q
10/08 20130101 |
Class at
Publication: |
701/207 ;
340/993 |
International
Class: |
G01C 021/26 |
Claims
What is claimed is:
1. A method of utilizing reports periodically sent from ships to a
remote tracking center for identifying ships that cause an
environmental spill, comprising: receiving ship reports including
current position data from ships; said ships sending the ship
reports when current ship data exceed at least one predefined
tolerance; storing said ship reports in a storage database;
inputting an origination time and an origination point of an
environmental spill; and comparing the origination time and the
origination point with said ship position reports saved in said
storage database; and selecting at least one ship that is the
mostly likely ship to have caused the environmental spill.
2. The method of claim 1, further comprising extrapolating the
positions of the ships between reports sent to the tracking
center.
3. The method of claim 1, wherein the predefined tolerances include
a speed tolerance, a change in track tolerance, a time tolerance
and a distance traveled tolerance.
4. A method of utilizing reports periodically sent from ships to a
remote tracking center for aiding in search and rescue efforts,
comprising: receiving ship reports comprising current position data
from ships; said ships sending the ship reports when current ship
data exceeds at least one predefined tolerance; storing said ship
reports in a storage database; inputting a last known position of a
ship in distress; comparing the position of the ship in distress
with the ship reports stored in said storage database; determining
a ship best suited to aid the ship in distress based upon a
plurality of factors, said plurality of factors including the
distance between the ship in distress and the best suited ship, the
size of the best suited ship, the current track of the best suited
ship and the speed of the best suited ship; and communicating the
position of the ship in distress to the best suited ship.
5. The method of claim 4, further comprising: searching said stored
data base for a last known position of said ship in distress.
6. A method of utilizing reports periodically sent from a ship to a
remote tracking center for projecting the progress of the ship,
comprising: preparing a model ship voyage; storing said model ship
voyage in a storage database; receiving ship reports including
current position data and current speed data from a ship; said ship
only sending said reports when a predefined tolerance is exceeded;
comparing said ship report with said model ship voyage; computing a
planned arrival time of said ship at a final destination based upon
the comparison between the ship report and said model ship voyage.
Description
RELATED APPLICATIONS
[0001] This application is a divisional of U.S. patent application
Ser. No. 10/146,436, filed May 14, 2002. which claims the benefit
of Provisional Application No. 60/290793, filed May 14, 2001,
entitled "Systems and Methods for Remotely Monitoring Marine
Traffic," Provisional Patent Application No. 60/299902, filed Jun.
21, 2001, entitled "Systems and Methods for Projecting Maritime
Ship Movements," Provisional Application No. 60/301209, filed Jun.
27, 2001, entitled "Systems and Methods for Remotely Monitoring
Marine Traffic," Provisional Application No. 60/330442, filed Oct.
17, 2001, entitled "Method and System for Marine Vessel Tracking
System," and Provisional Application No. 60/357752, filed Feb. 14,
2002, entitled "System and Method for Detecting Suspicious Activity
by Marine Vessels,"
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
FIELD OF THE INVENTION
[0002] This disclosure generally relates to automatic marine ship
tracking systems and methods. More particularly, this disclosure
relates to ship tracking systems and methods for accurately
monitoring the movement of marine ships utilizing a limited number
of transmissions from the marine ships.
SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION
[0003] The preferred embodiments of the present invention relate to
marine ship monitoring systems that automatically and accurately
monitor ship movements and are easily installed and operated.
Unlike conventional marine ship monitoring systems, the marine ship
monitoring systems of the present invention automatically and
accurately monitor the movements of ships utilizing a limited
number of transmissions from the ships, thereby advantageously
reducing the costs monitoring the ships. Ships utilizing one of the
preferred embodiments transmit a report to a remote tracking center
periodically. For example, the ship sends the report to the remote
tracking center when there is a significant change in the ship's
movement or position, or if a predetermined amount of time has
elapsed since the ship last sent a report to the remote tracking
center. The report includes current ship information, such as
current position and current movement information. Because the ship
sends a report each time a significant change in movement occurs,
the remote tracking center may accurately extrapolate the position
of the ship between the transmissions of the reports. In this
manner, the remote tracking center may retain an accurate history
of the ship's position and movements at all times.
[0004] One aspect of the present invention is a method and
apparatus of monitoring suspicious activity by marine ships from a
remote location utilizing a limited number of transmissions from
marine ships. The method and apparatus define geographic zones and
threshold values corresponding to each of the geographic zones. Via
a remote tracking center, the method and apparatus receive ship
data including a current position of a ship; the ship only sending
the ship data to the remote tracking center when a predefined ship
tolerance is exceeded. The method and apparatus compare the
position data with the geographical zones for determining if the
ship is in one of the geographic zones. When the ship is in one of
the geographic zones, the method and apparatus select the threshold
values corresponding to the geographic zone and analyze the ship
data with the threshold values for determining if the ship is
undergoing suspicious maneuvers. Further, if the ship undergoes
suspicious maneuvers, such maneuvers are flagged for
investigation.
[0005] Another aspect of the present invention is a further method
and apparatus of monitoring suspicious activity by marine ships
from a remote location utilizing a limited number of transmissions
from the marine ships. The method and apparatus define geographic
zones and values corresponding to each of the geographic zones, the
values including minimum speed values and change in track values.
The method and apparatus define appropriate ship tolerances
corresponding to each of the geographic zones. The appropriate ship
tolerances include a time tolerance, a speed tolerance and a change
in track tolerance. Via a remote tracking center, ship data are
received including stored position data, current speed data and
current track data from a ship, where the ship has stored ship
tolerances and only sends the ship data to said remote tracking
center when one of the stored ship tolerances is exceeded. The
stored ship tolerances are compared with the appropriate ship
tolerances and the appropriate ship tolerances are sent to the ship
when the stored ship tolerances are not the same as the appropriate
ship tolerances. The current position data is compared with the
geographical zones for determining if said ship is in one of the
geographic zones. When the ship is in one of the geographic zones,
the method analyzes the ship data with the values corresponding to
the geographic zone for determining if the ship is undergoing
suspicious maneuvers. The method and apparatus also flag the ship
for investigation when the ship is undergoing suspicious
maneuvers.
[0006] Another aspect of the present invention is a further method
and apparatus of monitoring suspicious activity of a marine ship
utilizing a limited number of transmissions from a ship. Via a
tracking center, the changes in the position of a ship are tracked
with respect to predefined zones. In the tracking center, the speed
threshold values are stored for each of the zones. Via a navigation
receiver in the ship, position signals are sent from a transmitter
of a position system. In the ship, ship data are monitored, the
data including a current ship track and a current ship speed. In
the marine ship, the ship data are compared with predefined
tolerances and a ship report is sent to the tracking center when
the ship data exceeds at least one of the tolerances, the ship
report comprising a current ship position, a current ship track and
a current ship speed. Via a communication unit in the tracking
center, the method and apparatus receive the report from the marine
ship. In the tracking center, the method and apparatus compare the
current ship position with predefined zones for determining if the
position of the marine ship is within one of the zones. In the
tracking center, the ship report is analyzed for determining if the
ship is undergoing suspicious maneuvers when the position of the
marine ship is within one of the zones. The method and apparatus
also flag the ship for investigation only when the ship is
undergoing suspicious maneuvers.
[0007] Another aspect of the present invention is a method and
apparatus of identifying environmental violators by utilizing a
limited number of transmissions from marine ships. The method and
apparatus receive ship reports comprising current position data
from at least one ship, where the ship sends the ship reports when
current ship data exceeds a predefined tolerance. The ship stores
the reports in a storage database. An origination time and an
origination point of an environmental spill are inputted. The
method and apparatus compare the origination time and the
origination point with the ship position reports saved in the
storage database. The method and apparatus also select at least one
ship that is the most likely ship to have caused the environmental
spill.
[0008] Another aspect of the present invention is a method and
apparatus that aids a ship in distress utilizing a limited number
of transmissions from marine ships. The method and apparatus
receive ship reports comprising current position data from ships,
where the ships sends the ship reports when current ship data
exceeds at least one predefined tolerance. The ship reports are
stored in a storage database. A last known position of a ship in
distress is inputted. The method and apparatus compare the position
of the ship in distress with the ship reports stored in the storage
database. A ship best suited to aid the ship in distress is
selected based upon a plurality of factors, where the plurality of
factors include the distance between the ship in distress and the
best suited ship, the size of the best suited ship, the current
track of the best suited ship and the speed of the best suited
ship. The method and apparatus also communicate the position of the
ship in distress to the best suited ship.
[0009] Another aspect of the present invention is a method and
apparatus that projects the progress of a ship utilizing a limited
number of transmissions from the marine ship. A model ship voyage
is prepared. The method and apparatus store the model ship voyage
in a storage database. Ship reports comprising current position
data and current speed data are received from a ship when a
predefined tolerance is exceeded. The method and apparatus compare
the ship report with the model ship voyage. The method and
apparatus also compute a planned arrival time of the ship at a
final destination based upon the comparison between the ship report
and the model ship voyage.
[0010] For purposes of summarizing the invention, certain aspects,
advantages and novel features of the invention have been described
herein above. It is to be understood, however, that not necessarily
all such advantages may be achieved in accordance with any
particular embodiment of the invention. Thus, the invention may be
embodied or carried out in a manner that achieves or optimizes one
advantage or group of advantages as taught herein without
necessarily achieving other advantages as may be taught or
suggested herein.
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS
[0011] The preferred embodiments of the present invention will be
described below in connection with the attached drawings in
which:
[0012] FIG. 1 is a schematic block diagram of the present inventive
embodiment of the marine ship tracking system;
[0013] FIG. 2 is a schematic illustration of the transmission paths
used in the preferred embodiment of the ship tracking system.
[0014] FIG. 3 illustrates a preferred series of steps for
monitoring movement of a marine ship used by a remote tracking
center;
[0015] FIG. 4 illustrates a preferred series of steps for
monitoring movement of a marine ship used by a mobile monitoring
unit located in marine ship;
[0016] FIG. 5 is an illustration of an example route of a ship
using the suspicious activity identification embodiment of the
present invention;
[0017] FIG. 6 illustrates a preferred series of steps for
monitoring suspicious activity of marine ships;
[0018] FIG. 7 is an illustration of a sample map of an
environmental spill and a route of a ship that is using the
identification of environmental violator's embodiment of the
present invention;
[0019] FIG. 8 illustrates a preferred series of steps for
identifying environmental violators;
[0020] FIG. 9 illustrates an exemplary map of a ship in distress
and other ships in proximity to the ship in distress;
[0021] FIG. 10 illustrates a preferred series of steps for aiding a
ship in distress;
[0022] FIG. 11 is an illustration of an exemplary map showing of a
route of a ship and various speed zones;
[0023] FIG. 12 is an illustration of an exemplary map showing of a
route of a ship and a remaining distance for the ship to
travel;
[0024] FIG. 13 is an exemplary illustration of a display for
charting the progress of a ship; and
[0025] FIG. 14 illustrates a preferred series of steps for
providing a projection of a ship's progress.
DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBIDIOMENT
[0026] Although certain preferred embodiments and examples are
disclosed below, it will be understood by those skilled in the art
that the invention extends beyond the specifically disclosed
embodiments to other alternative embodiments and/or uses of the
invention and obvious modifications and equivalents thereof. Thus,
it is intended that the scope of the invention herein disclosed
should not be limited by the particular disclosed embodiments
described herein.
[0027] Marine Ship Monitoring System and Methods
[0028] Disclosed herein are marine ship tracking systems. Also
disclosed are various methods, including methods for monitoring the
positions of marine ships, detecting ships engaged in suspicious
activity, identifying environmental violators, coordinating
maritime search and rescue efforts and projecting the progress of a
ship. As discussed in more detail below, the various approaches of
monitoring ships can operate independently or can be used
together.
[0029] Any method which is described herein is not limited to the
exact sequence of acts described, nor is it necessarily limited to
the practice of all of the acts set forth. Other sequences of
events or acts, or less than all of the events, or simultaneous
occurrences of the events, may be utilized in practicing the
method(s) in question.
[0030] Furthermore, in this description of the preferred
embodiments of the present invention, the "track" of a ship is
defined as the direction the ship has moved between position fixes
of a navigation receiver. Alternatively, the heading of a ship may
be used in place of the track. However, other known methods of
defining a track not disclosed herein may also be used.
[0031] Additionally, in this description of the preferred
embodiments of the present invention, the term "speed" of a ship is
defined as the distance a ship has traveled between position fixes
of a navigation receiver divided by the amount of time elapsed
between the position fixes. However, other known methods of
defining a speed not disclosed herein may also be used.
[0032] Preferred Embodiment of Marine Ship Positon Tracking
System
[0033] FIG. 1 illustrates a block diagram of the marine ship
tracking system 100. More specifically, the marine ship tracking
system 100 nominally includes a remote tracking center (RTC) 102
and a number of mobile monitoring units (MMU) 150 residing in
ships. A significant feature of this embodiment is that it provides
a system and method of tracking ships wherein the ships
periodically transmit a limited number of reports to a remote
center in order to provide an accurate history of a ship's
movements and extrapolating an accurate current position of the
ship.
[0034] Remote Tracking Center (RTC 102)
[0035] Further to FIG. 1, the RTC 102 advantageously includes a
communication unit 104 and a control system 106. The control system
106 includes control logic 108 and data storage 110. The control
logic 108 analyzes data received through the communication unit 104
and data stored in the data storage 110 for determining an
appropriate course of action. By way of specific example, the
control logic 108 may be a computer platform, such as the Compaq
Presario laptop Model 1800XL390.
[0036] The data storage 110 stores information that the control
system 106 uses for analyzing a ship's movement. For example,
geographical information and ship information may be stored in the
data storage 110. The ship information may include, for example,
descriptions of each ship subscribing to the tracking service and a
history of each of the ship's movements.
[0037] The communication unit 104 allows the RTC 102 to communicate
with the MMU 150 located in each subscribing ship. Preferably, the
communication unit 104 communicates with the MMU 150 via a
satellite communication system. In the preferred embodiment, the
communication unit 102 is connected to the Internet and
communicates with the MMU 150 via the Inmarsat C Satcom satellite
system. By way of specific example, a service of this type is
operated by Pole Star Ltd. of the United Kingdom as
PurpleFinder.com.TM.. Additionally, the communication unit 104
communicates with third parties interested in receiving reports
from the RTC 102. In one embodiment, the communication unit 104
sends email messages over the Internet to third parties, such as
government authorities, ship owners or ship operators.
[0038] Mobile Monitoring Unit (150)
[0039] The MMU 150, as shown in FIG. 1, provides position and
movement information regarding a marine ship to the RTC 102. The
MMU 150 includes a positioning unit 152 and a communication unit
154. The positioning unit 152 generally includes a global
positioning system (GPS) receiver 156, a processor 158, a data
storage unit 160 and a counter 162. The GPS receiver 156 receives
signals from GPS satellites for determining the current position of
the ship. By way of example, the GPS receiver 156 may be a 4000Si
receiver available from Trimble Navigation Ltd. located in
Sunnyvale, Calif. The GPS receiver 156 continuously receives
signals from the GPS satellite system for analysis by the processor
158. Alternatively, a trigger (not shown) may activate the GPS
receiver 156 so that the positioning unit 152 automatically
receives position updates periodically.
[0040] The processor 158, which may include for example a 68HC11
processor available from Motorola, Inc., analyzes the position data
received from the GPS receiver 156 with data stored in the data
storage 160. The processor 158 advantageously determines, for
example, the current speed of a ship, the amount of time since a
ship last transmitted a report to the RTC 102 and the distance that
a ship has traveled since the ship last transmitted a report to the
RTC 102. The processor 158 compares these values with tolerances
stored in the data storage 160. If the one of the values exceeds a
tolerance, then a report is sent to the RTC 102.
[0041] The data storage 160 stores data that will aid in
determining when the MMU 150 should send the next report to the RTC
102. For example, the data storage 160 electronically saves
predefined tolerances. Optionally, the data storage 160 may also
store a history of the movement of the ship, such as the position
of the ship, the speed of the ship and the track of the ship.
[0042] The counter 162 counts the time between reports being
transmitted to the RTC 102. In general, if the time between reports
exceeds a tolerance, the MMU 150 automatically sends a new report
to the RTC 102 containing updated information.
[0043] Further to FIG. 1, the MMU communication unit 154 allows the
MMU 150 to communicate with the RTC 102 and automatically transmit
reports to the RTC 102 for updating the actual position and
movement of the ship. As discussed above, the MMU 150 preferably
communicates with the RTC 102 via a satellite communication
system.
[0044] The positioning unit 152 advantageously incorporates
existing hardware already present on most commercial ships. In some
embodiments, adding new software to the existing hardware on a
commercial ship is the only modification necessary to provide the
features of the positioning unit 152.
[0045] However, the positioning unit 152 is advantageously tamper
proof. Consequently, because the existing GPS system on board a
ship is not considered tamper proof, it may be removed from a ship
and conveniently replaced by a tamper proof positioning unit 152.
The removed GPS system may then be converted into a tamper proof
positioning unit 152 and subsequently replace a GPS system on a
different ship. In this manner, the positioning units 150 may be
quickly and cost effectively installed on ships utilizing the ship
tracking system 100 (also referenced herein as "subscribing
ships").
[0046] General Operation of the Ship Tracking System 100
[0047] The operation of a first, general embodiment of the ship
tracking system 100 will be described in detail with reference to
FIGS. 2-4. FIG. 2 illustrates the communication paths between the
various systems used in the ship tracking system 100. A GPS
satellite system 202 transmits data over transmission paths 204a,
204b, 204c to a subscribing ship 210. The ship 210 receives the
data from the GPS satellite system 202 and processes the
information to obtain an accurate position.
[0048] The ship tracking system 100 uses a further satellite system
220 to communicate between the RTC 102 and the MMU 150. The ship
210 sends data to the RTC 102 through a data transmission path 222
to the satellite 220, which is then sent to a satellite
receiving/transmission station 230 through a transmission path 224
and is received by the RTC 102 through a transmission path 226.
Conversely, the RTC 102 sends data through transmission path 232 to
the receiving/transmission station 230, which then sends the data
through a data transmission path 234 to the satellite 220 and is
received by the ship 210 through a data transmission path 236.
Preferably, the data transmission paths 226 and 232 are over a
dedicated land line.
[0049] Optionally, the RTC 102 may also send messages to third
parties (not shown). In a preferred embodiment, the RTC 102
automatically sends the third party an email containing desired
information about a ship when needed. For example, the RTC 102 may
automatically send an email to a ship's owner when a ship is a
predefined distance from a destination port.
[0050] FIG. 3 graphically depicts the algorithm 300 generally used
by the RTC 102 of the ship tracking system 100. After Start 302,
the RTC 102 receives a report from a subscribing ship in Step 310.
As discussed above, the report is preferably sent from a ship via a
satellite communication network to the RTC 102. The RTC 102 then
saves the data contained in the report in the data storage 110 of
the MMU 150 in Step 320.
[0051] Next, in Step 330, the control logic 108 of the RTC 102
compares the data received from the MMU 150 with tolerances stored
in the data storage 110. Advantageously, various tolerances may be
used so that the desired monitoring aspects of the present
invention are achieved. Generally, various combinations of
tolerances are used for accomplishing a user's intended purpose.
These tolerances may include speed values, distance values,
geographic boundaries, time values and change in track values.
Preferably, the tolerances are defined by experienced and qualified
ships' masters for each different category of ship using the
tracking system 100. The tolerances will be described in further
detail in the descriptions of further embodiments disclosed
herein.
[0052] Based upon the comparison performed in Step 330, the control
logic 108 determines if the RTC 102 should send a message to the
subject ship with a new set of ship tolerances (Step 340).
Generally, the RTC 102 sends the MMU 150 new tolerances if it is
desired that the ship have tightened tolerances or loosened
tolerances. For example, if it is desired to know a relatively
accurate position of a ship, then the MMU 150 should have tighter
tolerances. Conversely, if it is desired to merely have a general
position of the ship, then the MMU 150 should have looser
tolerances.
[0053] Additionally, based upon the results of the comparison
performed in Step 330, the control logic 108 determines if the RTC
102 should send a message to a third party (Step 350). Generally, a
message will be automatically sent to a third party if a predefined
tolerance is exceeded, such as an email to ship owners notifying
them that their ship is a predefined distance away from a
destination port.
[0054] Furthermore, FIG. 4 graphically depicts a preferred
algorithm 400 used by the MMU 150 of the ship tracking system 100.
After Start 402, the MMU 150 determines if a new message has been
received from the RTC 102 containing new tolerances (Step 410). If
a report has been received containing new tolerances, then the Yes
path is followed to Step 420. In Step 420, the MMU 150 sets the
tolerances according to the new tolerances received in the report
from the RTC 102.
[0055] After the tolerances are set in Step 420, or if the No path
is followed from Step 410, the MMU 150 updates the ship's movement
data in Step 430. The updated movement data includes, for example,
GPS readings received from the GPS receiver 156 and timer readings
obtained from the counter 162. These readings are then analyzed by
the processor 158 and compared to the tolerances in Step 440. If
none of the tolerances are exceeded, then the process is repeated,
beginning at Step 410.
[0056] If one or more of the tolerances are exceeded, then a report
is sent to the RTC 102 updating the ship's position and movement in
Step 450. After the report is sent, the tolerances are reset, if
needed in Step 460 and the process is repeated from Step 410.
[0057] Advantageously, the above-described ship tracking system 100
may be applied in many different ways for monitoring ships. In many
cases, the same components of the marine ship tracking system 100
may be used, with only additional steps used in the operation of
the ship tracking system 100. Below are second, third, fourth and
fifth embodiments of the marine ship tracking system 100 that use
the same components as described above, but use additional steps in
the operation for accomplishing each respective function.
[0058] Suspicious Activity Embodiments
[0059] Generally, a second embodiment of the present invention is a
more specific application to the above-described first, general
embodiment. The second embodiment incorporates predefined zones of
suspicious activity into the first embodiment for monitoring
suspicious activity, such as potential smuggling or terrorist
activity. However, the types of monitored activity are not limited
to smuggling or terrorist activity, but instead may be used for
other types of monitoring applications not disclosed herein.
[0060] Furthermore, the second embodiment may advantageously use
the ship tracking system 100 disclosed above. The second embodiment
would then further include the use of the predefined zones of
suspicious activity in the operation of the ship tracking system
100.
[0061] The predefined zones of suspicious activity are
advantageously defined by experts, such as law enforcement
officials, based upon information that the zones have a significant
potential for terrorist or smuggling activity. The geographical
boundaries of these zones are entered into the RTC data storage 110
for comparing the position of the ships relative to the zones. If
the position of a ship is in one of the zones, then the RTC 102
takes a responsive course of action, such as sending tighter
tolerances to the MMU 150 installed in the ship or determining if
the ship is engaged in conduct that indicates suspicious
activity.
[0062] The operation of the second embodiments of the ship tracking
system 100 will be described in detail with reference to FIGS. 5
and 6. FIG. 5 graphically depicts an exemplary voyage route 510
traveled by a marine ship 520. In this example, the ship 520 leaves
a port A and arrives at a port F. Along the voyage route 510, the
ship 520 travels through a zone 530 that has been predefined as an
area of suspicious activity.
[0063] Throughout the voyage, the ship automatically sends reports
to the RTC 102 for monitoring the ship's movement. Thus, at some
point in time after the ship 520 travels into the predefined zone,
referenced as point B, the ship 520 sends a report to the RTC 102.
The RTC 102 analyzes the information contained in the ship's
report, and determines that the position of the ship 520 is in the
predefined zone of suspicious activity 530.
[0064] Generally, once the RTC 102 determines that a ship is in a
predefined zone of suspicious activity, the RTC 102 sends the
ship's MMU 150 tighter tolerances so that the RTC 102 can better
monitor whether the ship may be engaged in suspicious activity.
More specifically, the RTC 102 monitors indications suggestive of
suspicious activity, such as whether the monitored ship is moving
in a manner favorable to a boarding opportunity by another ship or
a helicopter. For example, data suggestive of boarding includes the
speed of the ship below a predefined value or the ship changing its
track into the wind. Preferably, experts, such as law enforcement
officials, predefine a ship's tolerances based upon the type of the
ship and the conditions in the predefined zone. Thus, various
predefined tolerances may be defined for each subscribing ship.
Furthermore, the tolerances advantageously take into account the
amount of traffic normally present in the zone, the speed the
particular type of ship normally travels in the zone and the track
the ship would normally travel in the zone. Preferably, tighter
tolerances include a shorter duration between transmission of
reports to the RTC 102, a threshold speed that the ship may travel
before triggering a report to be sent to the RTC 102 and a smaller
change in the ship's track before sending a report to the RTC
102.
[0065] As noted above, use of information sent in a position report
to the RTC 102 may reveal maneuvers suggestive of boarding or
onloading cargo without the ship stopping or even slowing
significantly. However, since boarding is difficult when a ship's
track is not heading into the wind or concomitant waves, it is
possible to monitor the ship's track relative to local wind as an
indicator of boarding/loading activities at sea. Therefore, the RTC
102 advantageously compares the track of a monitored ship in a
predefined zone of suspicious activity with the direction of the
wind and waves.
[0066] Optionally, multiple sets of tolerances may be used for
zones of suspicious activity having varying navigation conditions.
Thus, for example, the RTC 102 may send the ship 520 a first set of
tolerances when the ship first enters the zone 530 and a second,
different set of tolerances at a later time while the ship is still
in the zone 530.
[0067] Further to FIG. 5, the ship 520 travels through the
predefined zone 530, all the while periodically sending reports to
the RTC 102. At reference point C, the ship 520 sends a report to
the RTC 102. The RTC 102 analyzes the report and determines that
the ship has performed a maneuver which indicates suspicious
activity, such as the ship 520 traveling at a speed below the
predefined speed threshold value or a significant change in track
into the wind. In response, the RTC 102 sends a report to the
appropriate third party responsible for investigating potential
terrorist activity on ships, such as the coast guard.
[0068] Position D of FIG. 5 illustrates that the ship 520 has
entered the predefined zone 530. Upon receipt of a report at the
RTC 102 at reference point D, the RTC 102 analyzes the report and
recognizes that the ship 520 is no longer in the zone 530.
Consequently, the RTC 102 sends the ship new, looser tolerances
because the ship is no longer in a zone of suspicious activity.
However, in one embodiment, the RTC 102 maintains tight tolerances
on the ship 520 at all times after the ship 520 has performed a
maneuver indicating suspicious activity for closely monitoring any
further suspicious activity.
[0069] Position E of FIG. 5 illustrates that the ship 520, having
engaged in suspicious activity, is commanded to anchor away from
the destination port F, and directed to anchor at reference point
E. A third party, such as the coast guard, may then inspect the
ship and question the crew before the ship docks at the port F. In
this manner, the third party may determine if hazardous materials
or other contraband are on the ship 520 before the ship 520 is
close to the port F, where the hazardous material or other
contraband could cause significant damage or be quickly
offloaded.
[0070] Additionally, if the third party determines that the ship
520 is safe, then the ship 520 may dock and unload its cargo at the
destination port F.
[0071] FIG. 6 graphically depicts the algorithm 600 used by the
second embodiment to monitor suspicious activity. After start 602,
the RTC 102 receives a report from a ship in step 604. The RTC 102
then saves the data received in the report in the data storage 110
in Step 606.
[0072] Next, in Step 608, the RTC 102 determines if the ship
currently has a correct set of tolerances. As discussed above,
experts advantageously define tolerances for each geographic region
based upon various factors. For example, zones of suspicious
activity generally have tighter tolerances than other geographic
regions. Thus, in Step 608, the RTC 102 compares the current set of
tolerances stored in the subject ship (which may be determined from
the last set of tolerances the RTC 102 sent to the ship) with the
tolerances defined for the geographic region the ship is currently
traveling through. For example, if the ship has sent its first
report since entering a predefined zone of suspicious activity,
then the RTC 102 will likely determine that the subject ship
requires new tolerances because zones of suspicious activity
commonly require tighter tolerances. Accordingly, the RTC 102 will
send a message to the ship containing the new tolerances in Step
610 if new tolerances are required. In contrast, the No path is
followed to Step 612 if the RTC 102 determines that the subject
ship does not require new tolerances.
[0073] The RTC 102 determines if the subject ship is in a
predefined zone of suspicious activity in Step 612. Here, the RTC
102 preferably uses position data contained in the report sent from
the ship. The RTC 102 compares the position data with the stored
boundaries of the predefined zones of suspicious activity. If the
position of the ship falls within a predefined zone of suspicious
activity, then the Yes path is followed. In contrast, if the
position of the ship does not fall within a predefined zone, then
the NO path is followed to Step 604 and the process is
repeated.
[0074] If the Yes path is followed from Step 612, the RTC 102 then
analyzes the data contained in the ship's report for suspicious
activity in Steps 618-630. In the preferred embodiment, the RTC 102
analyzes the speed of the ship (Step 618) and the track of the ship
(Steps 620-622) for suspicious activity. The Steps 618, 620, and
622 may be performed sequentially (as shown in FIG. 6), or the
steps may be performed simultaneously.
[0075] In step 618, the RTC compares the current speed of the ship
with a predefined minimum speed. Advantageously, the predefined
minimum speed is determined for each type of ship, as determined by
qualified ships' masters or other experts in the field. Generally,
the minimum speed is based upon the maximum speed the respective
class of ship normally travels when being boarded by another ship.
If the current speed is below the predefined minimum speed, then
the Yes path is followed to step 624. In contrast, if the current
speed is above the predefined minimum speed, then the No path is
followed.
[0076] If the No path is followed, then the RTC 102 compares the
track of the ship and the speed of the ship with the current wind
data in steps 620 and 622. First, in Step 620, the RTC 102 obtains
current wind data in the geographical proximity to the subject
ship. Next, in Step 622, the RTC 102 analyzes the direction of the
wind and strength of the wind with the current ship track and the
current ship speed and determines if the conditions are favorable
for a boarding opportunity. Advantageously, ships' masters and
other experts in the pertinent field predefine conditions for a
boarding opportunity which are stored in the data storage 110. If
the conditions are favorable for a boarding opportunity, then the
Yes path is followed. If the conditions are not favorable for a
boarding opportunity, then the No path is followed to Step 604.
[0077] Additionally, in one embodiment, the RTC 102 contains data
that allows the RTC 102 to discriminate between a possible
helicopter boarding opportunity and boarding opportunity by another
ship. Again, ships' masters and other experts in the pertinent
field predefine the conditions favorable for a helicopter boarding
opportunity and a ship boarding opportunity.
[0078] If the Yes path is followed to step 624, then the RTC 102
flags the ship for investigation and reports the ship to the
appropriate third party. For example, the RTC 102 may send an email
to government authorities responsible for checking incoming ships
for contraband. The authorities may then inspect the ship and
question the ship's crew regarding the suspicious ship movements.
Furthermore, the authorities may require that the ship anchor away
from the port in the event that the ship has dangerous material on
board, such as explosives or toxic chemicals.
[0079] Identification of Environmental Violators Embodiments
[0080] A third embodiment of the ship tracking system 100 in
accordance with the present invention is illustrated in FIGS. 7 and
8. Generally, the third embodiment identifies environmental
violators by backtracking a ship's voyage route to determine if the
ship was near the origination point of an environmental spill at
the time of the spill. Advantageously, the ship tracking system 100
stores a history of the positions of each subscribing ship in the
RTC data storage 110. Once the origination position and time of the
environmental spill is determined, the RTC 102 compares the
origination time and position of the spill with the stored
histories of each of the subscribing ships. The RTC 102 then
determines the most likely ship or ships that may have caused the
spill based upon the proximity of the ship or ships to the
origination point and time of the spill.
[0081] Furthermore, the third embodiment advantageously utilizes
the same system and methods that are utilized in the first, general
preferred embodiment (shown in FIGS. 1-4). However, the operation
for third embodiment additionally comprises the steps of: first,
using knowledge of tidal currents to backtrack the location time of
an environmental spill; and second, using the RTC storage database
110 containing the histories of ships' movements to determine which
ship or ships were closest to the origination point and time of the
environmental spill.
[0082] FIG. 7 depicts an exemplary area of an environmental spill
710. The origination point of the environmental spill 710 is
referenced as point A. Here the environmental spill 710 has
extended toward the shore of a landmass 720. The tidal currents are
depicted as arrows and illustrate that the tidal currents are
heading toward the shore of the landmass 720.
[0083] FIG. 7 further shows a route 730 traveled by a ship using
the ship tracking system 100. Each position of the ship where the
ship sent the RTC 102 a report is shown by a dot along the route
730.
[0084] Through the use of the knowledge of the tidal currents'
heading and speed, an origination point A and an origination time
of the spill 710 is calculated. The origination point A and time of
the spill 710 are then compared with the stored positions of the
subscribing ships. The RTC 102 determines that the ship travelling
along the route 730 was the closest in proximity to the calculated
origination point A at the calculated time of the spill 710. The
RTC 102 then notifies the proper third party, such as law
enforcement officials, that the subject ship was the likely cause
of the environmental spill 710. The third party may then examine
the ship and question the ship's crew regarding the environmental
spill 710.
[0085] Furthermore, the ship tracking system 100 advantageously
stores all the data sent from a ship to the RTC 102, such as the
position, time, track and speed of the ship. Through the use of the
stored data, the RTC 102 can also back track an accurate history of
the position of the ship at all times. Consequently, even if a
first ship's closest reported position to the environmental spill
is a further distance away from a second ship's closest reported
position, the third embodiment may backtrack the first ship's route
and determine that the first ship was actually closer than the
second ship to the origination point A of the spill at the time of
the spill.
[0086] FIG. 8 graphically depicts the algorithm 800 used by the
third embodiment to identify environmental violators. After the
start 802 of the algorithm, the time and position of the
environmental spill is calculated 804. In a preferred embodiment,
the RTC 102 uses knowledge of the tidal currents near the location
of the spill to backtrack the origination time and position. In an
alternative embodiment, the time and position of the spill is
calculated by a third party, such as by law enforcement officials.
In the alternative embodiment, the calculated time and position of
the spill are then inputted into the ship tracking system 100. Once
the time and location of the spill is determined, the RTC 102
compares the spill time and location with the ship movement data
stored in the data storage 110 (Step 806). The most likely ships to
have caused the spill are then determined based upon the stored
movement data in Step 808. A message is then sent to the
appropriate third party, such as law enforcement officials, with a
list of the ships that most likely caused the environmental spill
(Step 810).
[0087] Search and Rescue Embodiments
[0088] A fourth embodiment of the ship tracking system 100 is
illustrated in FIGS. 9 and 10. Generally, the fourth embodiment
aids in search and rescue efforts by advantageously utilizing the
reports sent by the subscribing ships to determine which ship or
ships are best suited to aid a ship in distress. More specifically,
the fourth embodiment compares the position of a ship in distress
with data stored in the RTC data storage 110 for determining which
ship or ships are best suited to aid the ship in distress. For
example, the fourth embodiment preferably considers factors for
determining which ships are best suited to aid the ship in
distress, such as: which ships are closest to the ship in distress,
which ships would be able to reach the ship in distress within the
shortest amount of time and which ships are capable of actually
aiding the ship in distress.
[0089] Furthermore, the fourth embodiment advantageously utilizes
the same system and methods that are utilized in the first, general
preferred embodiment (shown in FIGS. 1-4). However, the operation
for fourth embodiment additionally comprises the step of comparing
the position of a ship in distress with data stored in the RTC data
storage 110 for determining which ship or ships are best suited to
aid the ship in distress.
[0090] Optionally, the fourth embodiment may also support the
existing AMVER system sponsored by the United States Coast Guard
for assisting in search and rescue efforts. The fourth embodiment
may advantageously electronically interface directly to the
existing AMVER system computers and continuously provide accurate
position tracking without human reporting or data entry, and
therefore, minimizing error.
[0091] FIG. 9 is an exemplary illustration of a ship under distress
902 and ships 904(a-e) in the proximity of the ship in distress.
Each of the ships 904(a-e) have a velocity vector illustrating the
heading and speed of the ship, depicted as a line extending from
the ship.
[0092] Using the search and distress aspect of the ship tracking
system 100, the RTC 102 is notified that the ship 902 is in need of
assistance. The RTC 102 may be notified by the ship 902 or may be
notified by a third party, such as the coast guard. The RTC 102
determines the closest ships 904(a-e) to the ship in distress 902
and determines which ship is best suited to aid the ship in
distress 902. For example, as shown in FIG. 9, the ship 904e is
closer to the ship 902 than any of the other ships 904(a-d).
However, the ship 904e is heading away from the ship 902.
Conversely, ship 904b is further away from ship 902 than the ship
904e. However, the ship 904b is heading in the direction toward the
ship 902. Thus, the tracking system 100 may determine that the ship
904b is the better suited ship to aid the ship 902 than is the ship
904e because ship 904b will not have to significantly change its
heading.
[0093] Furthermore, the ship tracking system 100 utilizing the
search and rescue aspect preferably additionally analyzes the
maneuverability characteristics and size of each of the ships
904(a-e) to factor in which ship is best suited to aid the ship
902. For example, the ship 904d is heading away from the ship 902,
however, the ship 904d may be highly maneuverable and be able to
turn around and aid the ship 902 sooner than any of the other ships
904(a-c or e). Moreover, some of the ships 904(a-e) may be too
small to adequately help the ship 902. Thus, the ship tracking
system 100 preferably analyzes the size of each of the ships
904(a-e) for determining if each of the ships 904(a-e) are capable
of helping the ship 902.
[0094] FIG. 10 graphically depicts the algorithm 1000 used by the
tracking system 100 to aid in search and rescue efforts. After the
start 1002 of the algorithm 1000, a message is received by the RTC
102 from a ship in distress (Step 1004). If the ship is a
subscribing ship, and the report does not contain the current
position of the ship, then the RTC 102 looks up the last know
position sent to the RTC 102 by the ship in distress. If the report
does contain the current position of the ship, then the current
position contained in the message is inputted into the RTC control
system 106.
[0095] Once the ship tracking system 100 identifies the most
current known position of the ship in Step 1006, the position of
the ship is compared with data stored in the data storage 110 to
determine which ship is best suited to aid the ship in distress
(Step 1008). In general, the ships most suited to help out the ship
in distress are the ships that can reach the ship in distress the
fastest and have the capabilities to actually aid the ship in
distress. Preferably, factors such as distance from the ship in
distress, track of the ship, speed of the ship, the size of the
ship and the maneuverability of the ship are analyzed to determine
which ship is best suited to help the ship in distress.
[0096] Once the ship or ships that are best suited to aid the ship
in distress are determined, the best suited ships are contacted and
asked to help the ship in distress (Step 1010). In a preferred
embodiment, and the RTC 102 sends an email message containing a
list of the best suited ships to a third party, such as the coast
guard or other government agency. The third party then contacts the
ships and asks the ships to help in the search and rescue
effort.
[0097] Projecting the Progress of a Marine Ship Embodiments
[0098] A fifth embodiment of the ship tracking system 100 is
illustrated in FIGS. 11-14. Generally, the fifth embodiment
compares a predefined model voyage of a ship with the actual
progress of the ship to produce an automatic, continuing updated
projection of the ship's arrival time.
[0099] Generally, differing models for future position may be
applied depending upon whether a ship's progress is currently ahead
of a planned schedule or behind of a planned schedule, and whether
the ship is currently above or below planned speed. Additionally,
models may, for example, account for weather patterns, ocean
currents or other factors that may cause a ship to arrive at a
destination port ahead or behind of schedule. Furthermore,
preferably the model may change or account for a ship choosing a
new route due to, for example, avoiding weather conditions or
traffic.
[0100] After the plot of positions is calculated using these
models, they are preferably displayed in a format for easy
comprehension by the user. The display plots time ahead of planned
schedule on the vertical axis of a two axis plot and
distance/time-to-go on the horizontal axis. In this manner, trends
toward or away from the planned schedule become immediately
apparent and improved decisions regarding probability of attaining
a particular estimated time of arrival may be obtained by a
user.
[0101] FIG. 11 depicts a voyage undertaken by a ship originating in
Port 1102 and terminating at Port 1116. FIG. 11 is merely an
example of a route that may be used with the preferred embodiments
of the present invention. It will be immediately apparent to those
skilled in the art that this technique similarly applies to other
voyage routes and conditions. During the voyage shown in FIG. 11, a
captain has planned to maneuver out of Port 1102 at slow speed
until accelerating to a cruise speed within zone 1104, clear of
traffic and control areas. FIG. 11 shows multiple additional speed
zones 1106-1112. However, typically a cruise speed may be
maintained for great distances, and such detailed breakdown may not
always be required. In this example, upon reaching the zone 1112,
the captain plans to slow the ship's speed as commonly required by
high traffic zones and finally slows to minimal maneuvering speed
adjacent to the harbor. Preferably, the captain may then supply
this voyage plan to a computer operator who enters the data into a
shore-based computer as indicated in Step 1440 of FIG. 14. The
supplied voyage plan aids in maintaining or updating the model
voyage plan.
[0102] FIG. 13 illustrates an exemplary preferred display 1300
where time ahead of schedule is plotted on a vertical axis 1324, a
distance-to-go is plotted along the bottom horizontal scale 1326,
and a time-to-go is plotted along a top horizontal scale 1328.
Preferably, the bottom horizontal scale showing distance-to-go
preferably remains fixed while the top horizontal scale showing
time-to-go preferably varies with the speed of the ship under
consideration.
[0103] The center horizontal axis 1330 of the display 1300 is a
plot of locations and time if the subject ship remains exactly on
the schedule. The center horizontal axis 1330 may be non-linear;
however, the center horizontal axis is linear as shown in FIG. 13.
The center horizontal axis 1330 shows how far ahead or behind
schedule a ship is at a corresponding time of observation. Reaching
positions along the ship's route ahead of schedule plots the ship's
position 1334 above the axis 1330 and arriving late plots the
ship's position below the axis 1330.
[0104] A ship's present route is referenced as numeral 1334 in FIG.
13. The solid line portion of the ship's route 1334 depicts the
ship's time-ahead-of-schedule relative to the ship's distance-to-go
that the ship has already traveled. The dotted line portion of the
ship's present route 1334 depicts a predicted
time-ahead-of-schedule relative to the distance-to-go. The ship's
most current position is preferably depicted as a large dot, as
shown in FIG. 13 as reference numeral 1320.
[0105] FIG. 14 depicts a preferred sequence of steps for projecting
the movements of a ship. The results of the sequence of steps are
preferably displayed, such as shown in FIG. 13. The initial step
1440 is to model the location of a ship over a route at any
corresponding time based upon the speeds planned for each zone and
the scheduled departure. It will be apparent to one skilled in the
art that such calculation may be readily done by various methods.
In a preferred embodiment, the calculation may be done in
substantially real time by computer process as a ship progresses
along the ship's route using wide employed methods of dead
reckoning. In an alternative preferred embodiment, the entire route
may be calculated prior to departure of the ship and placed in a
database for later reference.
[0106] As shown in FIG. 14, the second step 1442 preferably
calculates the vertical displacement from the planned schedule. For
example, a ship's location may be received over the Internet and
the planned time at the position is calculated or referenced in a
database. At step 1444, the actual time is then subtracted from the
planned time and applied as the vertical coordinate "time ahead of
schedule".
[0107] For example, FIG. 12 illustrates a ship 1220 well along in
its voyage and has a remaining distance-to-go 1222. The
distance-to-go 1222 over the planned route is preferably derived
from a model route, as described above. The distance-to-go may then
be applied on a graph, such as depicted in FIG. 13, as the
horizontal coordinate and the time behind schedule is applied as
the vertical coordinate. Plotting the time-to-go and the time
behind schedule as a continuous line 1234 provides an excellent
assessment of trend in catching up or falling further behind
schedule.
[0108] A further aspect of the fifth embodiment is the application
of the trend to a model of the remainder of a ship's voyage. As
shown in FIG. 14, evaluation Step 1446 illustrates that if the
value of "time ahead of schedule" is negative, i.e. behind
schedule, then evaluation Step 1448 assesses whether the ship's
speed of advance is greater than or equal to that scheduled for the
zone. Speed of advance is defined as the portion of a velocity
vector parallel to the great circle route to the destination. If
the speed of advance is less than or equal to the scheduled speed,
then the logical assumption is made that the subject ship is for
some reason unable to make the planned speed and cannot be expected
to be able to catch up to the original schedule. Step 1450
specifies as a result, that for all future legs the current speed
will be the maximum unless lower limits are scheduled in some
zones.
[0109] Conversely, if the speed of advance is determined at
evaluation Step 1448 to be greater than that planned, the logical
assumption is made that the ship is attempting to catch up to
schedule. Thus Step 1452 specifies that the higher speed will only
be maintained until the ship has gotten back on schedule and speed
will be reduced to save wear-and-tear on the ship.
[0110] Furthermore, evaluation Step 1446 illustrates that if the
value of "time ahead of schedule" is positive, then evaluation Step
1458 assesses whether the ship's speed is greater than or equal to
that scheduled for the zone. If it is not, then the logical
assumption is that the ship is running slowly to get back on
schedule. Thus, Step 1462 specifies that once the ship is back on
schedule it will resume a higher speed and follow the original
schedule.
[0111] If the speed of advance of the ship is found to be greater
than scheduled, the logical assumption is made that the ship is not
following the published schedule and will arrive significantly
early. In this case, Step 1460 specifies the use of the current
speed until zone speed limits require it to slow down. Step 1464
simply flags the result for interrogation by the shipping
agent.
[0112] Returning to the two cases referenced by numerals 1450 and
1462 where speed is below plan, a final check on progress is made
in evaluation Step 1454, which assures that a major event will not
have taken place that has slowed the ship drastically without being
recognized. If the speed of advance falls below a pre-set level--in
the preferred embodiment just 1/2 of the planned speed--then the
program flags the arrival time as indeterminate 1457. Other levels
might be selected such as less than five knots or that which would
cause the arrival to be more than 24 hours late.
[0113] If the speed of advance is within the above limits, then
Step 1456 calculates the current ETA based upon the rules produced
along each path and displays it for the user. The cycle preferably
repeats itself and begins again at Step 1442. The cycle preferably
repeats itself in predetermined time intervals. For example, the
time intervals between the cycle repeating may be much greater
while the ship is further away from the destination port than when
the ship is close to port. Alternatively, the time intervals may be
constant throughout the ship's voyage or the time intervals may be
continuous. In one preferred embodiment, the time intervals vary
according to the location of the ship relative to the destination
port. Furthermore, in an alternative preferred embodiment, a user
may initiate the cycle independent of a time interval.
[0114] Although described above in connection with particular
embodiments of the present invention, it should be understood the
descriptions of the embodiments are illustrative of the invention
and are not intended to be limiting. Accordingly, various
modifications and applications may occur to those skilled in the
art without departing from the true spirit and scope of the
invention as defined in the appended claims.
* * * * *