Can AIS Be Used To Track All Vessels So Equipped?

[estarzinger]

Originally Posted by Paul Elliott

Evans, I'm not doubting you, but can you point me to the appropriate section of this document? I did a search for AIS (nothing), "Automatic Identification" (found the basic AIS carriage requirements and implementation deadlines and not much more), and "tracking" (found some satellite-based tracking goals).

Paul, the "authorization" is a very short section (70113) of that law. I have quoted it below.

If you know where to look, the USCG is not "hiding" this operation. USCG: Nationwide Automatic Identification System This page has apparently not been updated since 2007, but they have continued to roll out the program.

I am aware of their tracking operation(s) thru Beth, who has part of her portfolio managing BoatUS's MMSI program. She just (within the past month) met with the USCG, and the USCG was quite upfront about what they were doing. BoatUS however was disturbed because their intent (as stated in the MOU about the MMSI program) was to aid SAR and not law enforcement. There has been no-one from SAR even attending the meetings.


‘‘§ 70113. Maritime intelligence
‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall implement a system to collect, integrate, and analyze information concerning vessels operating on or bound for waters subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, including information related to crew, pas- sengers, cargo, and intermodal shipments.
‘‘(b) CONSULTATION.—In developing the information system under subsection (a), the Secretary shall consult with the Transpor- tation Security Oversight Board and other departments and agen- cies, as appropriate.
‘‘(c) INFORMATION INTEGRATION.—To deter a transportation security incident, the Secretary may collect information from public and private entities to the extent that the information is not pro- vided by other Federal departments and agencies.

[Robin3]

Originally Posted by Paul Elliott

I think everyone is monitoring this forum. Many years ago some people used to sprinkle our email with trigger keywords such as "anthrax", "krytron" "ANFO" "espionage", "NSA", etc., on the premise that if enough people did this the intelligence agencies abilities to interpret all the intercepted email would be overwhelmed. I think we lost that battle years ago.

Of course I would never put those kind of keywords in any of my internet activities.

like you just did you mean??

[conachair]

Originally Posted by boatman61

I'm damned if I can find it now but MarkJ brought this up a few months back and I did not believe it.. so I did a search and found a directive that AIS would be compulsory for all recreational craft over 8 metres visiting EU waters.. took me aback when I read it.. I'll keep looking and post if I find it..

Think you must have dreamt that....

Though looks like fishing boats over 15m from next year:
http://ec.europa.eu/fisheries/cfp/co...s/index_en.htm

Which ain't such a bad thing

[estarzinger]

I should note that i personally am a fan of AIS . . . It helps me a lot in collision avoidance.

However, I also think we should all be aware that the "mandate/requirement" aspect of ais has primarily been driven by security and not collision concerns. The big ship requirement came in 2002, as did the us law/tracking program, as have the sailing racing requirements (I have sat in on many of these meetings) ultimately pushed thru in response to 911. And the us dept of homeland security is currently funding a couple programs designed to encourage us all (small pleasure boaters) to use AIS voluntarily, and their primary intent/objective is tracking/law enforcement and not SAR.

My personal feeling is that AIS tracking is going to have zero impact on terrorism (catching or preventing), and could have an annoying impact related to privacy and minor law enforcement, and it is moderately expensive for the tax payer. So, personally I think this tracking is "something we can do, that we probably should not".

[rebel heart]

I was on a submarine and we put a firing solution and assigned a weapon to every contact that was not verified friendly (a US or coalition warship). So the guys with 600lbs of PBX aimed at you don't care about your AIS.

SPY3 radars have about a ~200 mile range, and all of the information received from every warship is uploaded to a satellite network and downloaded to all others (either in real time or batch). Let's not even get into the MQ4C Triton UAV, P3-Orions, or the countless other types of eyes in the sky collecting intelligence.

If you want to increase your odds of getting run down by a freighter by frowning on AIS, that's your business. Not having the money is one thing, avoiding it for the government boogeyman is crazy.

edit: Evan, just read your comments and my reply was directed towards the thread starter not you. I spent a few years trying to chase down bad guys so although it's possible for innocent boats to get swept up in this stuff, I have a hard time hearing mariners yell and scream about the piracy off the Gulf of Aden but then protest increased global maritime security mechanisms.

Having a policy of "every vessel needs to broadcast AIS" in some future where the costs are much lower would make it a lot easier to do satellite or areal surveillance, cross reference against AIS contacts, and then investigate the delta.

[carstenb]

Originally Posted by boatman61

Well guys.. if your coming over to Europe.. check the rules or you'll be busted... its gonna be compulsory come 2015...
Then we can be like your guys at the US airports and say.. "We just love kicking you out.." as you arrive..

compulsory for whom? recreational boats?

[Krogensailor]

Heads up, we're not talking about Somalia! We are, or I am, talking about Florida. And my, or your, military experience hardly has anything to do with the question I ask. The old saw that there are no stupid questions, just the ones that aren't ask, doesn't seem to apply to our friendly little forum. You are free, sort of, for now, to hold any position you care to regarding your freedoms and privacy. And seeing as how your submarine training gives you a medical degree for diagnosing craziness, let me use my military firefighters training to state that you sound uninformed and stupid. I could load links to hundreds of incidents where the gov has overstepped their boundrys and harmed private citizens. A breif case. A man buys a sailboat, sailing along is boarding by the CG, a dog smells Marijauna , his boat is impounded, torn apart, holes drilled through the hull, cabinets removed. In the end it was decided that a privious owner had transported some amount of drugs, or spilled his rollings. Upshot? He got his boat back, had a two year claim for compensation. Cancelld his travel plans and probably sought out a therapist, or a submarine guy, to deal with the emotional baggage of being helped and protected by the benevolence of the CG. This topic is not about "boogeymen" it's about the unnecessary gathering of pretty much useless info for no purpose, on the suface, whatsoever. So feel free to surrender your autonomy and libery if you so choose, and feel proud about it to boot. B.Franklin say's, 'those who would be willing to surrender thier freedoms for a bit of safety, deserve neither'. I don't think for a moment that the authoruties local of otherwise are in service to my protection and care. Their there to get a paycheck or exercise their power. And just how many boats have been run down by ships lately? I think we like our little box's and gadgets to the detriment of knowledge and common sense.

[Krogensailor]

http://www.uscgboating.org/assets/1/...g/Page/705.PDF

According to Gov stats, Somewhere between 1 (2012) and 63 (over a number of years) guys got killed in a commercial collision. I'll take my chances. Think Darwin awards

[Robin3]

I knew I should stay well away from controversial threads like anything remotely to do with anchors, AIS and non -affordable healthcare, but then I get tempted and....

Happy holidays all.

[Krogensailor]

"firefighters training to state that you sound uninformed and stupid." sorry that will be seen as 'not nice' up there with "crazy". So I'll make it, uninformed and shortsighted, with a tad bit of naivete.

Couldn't agree more Robin.

[goboatingnow]

There is no requirement now or forthcoming for leisure vessels under 24m to have Ais in Europe and current privacy laws would prevent such data from being used or collected

There is a requirement that all commercial fishing vessels over 15m will have Ais in the EU by 2015. There is also a debate in the IMO that would roll this out worldwide.

Dave

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by rebel heart

I was on a submarine and we put a firing solution and assigned a weapon to every contact that was not verified friendly (a US or coalition warship). So the guys with 600lbs of PBX aimed at you don't care about your AIS.

SPY3 radars have about a ~200 mile range, and all of the information received from every warship is uploaded to a satellite network and downloaded to all others (either in real time or batch). Let's not even get into the MQ4C Triton UAV, P3-Orions, or the countless other types of eyes in the sky collecting intelligence.

If you want to increase your odds of getting run down by a freighter by frowning on AIS, that's your business. Not having the money is one thing, avoiding it for the government boogeyman is crazy.

edit: Evan, just read your comments and my reply was directed towards the thread starter not you. I spent a few years trying to chase down bad guys so although it's possible for innocent boats to get swept up in this stuff, I have a hard time hearing mariners yell and scream about the piracy off the Gulf of Aden but then protest increased global maritime security mechanisms.

Having a policy of "every vessel needs to broadcast AIS" in some future where the costs are much lower would make it a lot easier to do satellite or areal surveillance, cross reference against AIS contacts, and then investigate the delta.

This is exactly the type of scary thinking. Somehow action in Somalia justifies increases surveillance at home. This is exactly how are civil liberties are being eroded by Security Think.

AiS will never be an effective tracking system , to easy to turn it off , very easy to spoof , it was never designed as such.

It's time the people stopped and protested such intrusion into their lives in the name of " Security "

" people who trade freedom for security deserve neither "
Dave

[ozskipper]

I would think governments would be more worried about people with AIS who dont use it.. What are they hiding? would be my question.

[estarzinger]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

There is a requirement that all commercial fishing vessels over 15m will have Ais in the EU by 2015. There is also a debate in the IMO that would roll this out worldwide.
Dave

Fishermen have been the target of the next USCG AIS mandate . . . But the fishermen here have been pushing back HARD. So far they have stopped/stalled the attempt.

Honestly, as a sailor interested in collision avoidance . . . I would be delighted if the fishermen started running AIS. They represent the biggest missing part today. But I do not support a mandate if the primary point/purpose is to enable government tracking.

Originally Posted by ozskipper

I would think governments would be more worried about people with AIS who dont use it.. What are they hiding? would be my question.

Actually, that was sort of exactly the uscg thinking. Get everyone 'legal' running AIS and then we only have to go investigate the "dark" targets. Unfortunately that misses the fact that it would be dead easy for a drug runner, people smuggler or terrorist to get an "innocent" AIS/MMSI and then just blend into the ais clutter. And essentially penalize/criminalize those who for one reason or another do not want to be tracked (like sailing racers and fishermen).

[casique8]

I have a class B AIS and yes if there radio is registered and connected to a GPS it will show on plotter.

Sent from my SM-G900T using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app