MASS Code + IACS UR

Maritime Autonomous Surface Ships (MASS) is the emerging category of vessels operating with reduced or removed onboard crew. The IMO is developing a non-mandatory MASS Code (target adoption 2028, entry-into-force ~2032) as the framework instrument. IACS + national administrations are developing supporting URs + notation regimes. This reference covers the current regulatory landscape + career-implications for working seafarers.

Autonomy degrees

IMO MSC 100 (December 2018) defined four degrees of MASS operation. The framework distinguishes "autonomous" (rule-based algorithmic response) from "automated" (executes procedures without independent decision-making) and specifies the human-role dependency:

Regulatory framework — IMO MASS Code

• MSC 105 (April 2022). Endorsed the roadmap for developing a non-mandatory MASS Code. Target adoption at MSC 110 (~2028).
• MSC 106-108 (2022-2024). Correspondence + intersessional working groups progressing on: (a) definitions + roles, (b) SOLAS chapter interaction, (c) COLREG interaction, (d) STCW interaction (Remote Operator training standards), (e) MARPOL interaction, (f) liability + insurance interaction.
• MSC 109-110 (~2025-2028). Target completion + adoption of the non-mandatory MASS Code.
• Post-2028. Transition to a mandatory MASS Code envisioned by ~2032. Full SOLAS + STCW amendments likely 2035+.

IACS supporting work

• IACS Rec. 173 (Recommendation on the Cyber Resilience of Ships, 2020). Predecessor to the mandatory UR E26/E27 (2024). Established the cyber-resilience baseline that MASS operations require substantially more of.
• IACS UR E26 (cyber resilience of ships, 1 July 2024 mandatory). Cyber-resilience of new-build ships — the foundation for any MASS operation. Substantially applies to remote-operations dependency + supervisory control systems.
• IACS UR E27 (cyber resilience of on-board systems + equipment, 1 July 2024 mandatory). Equipment-level requirements. MASS operations depend on distributed intelligent equipment communicating via secure networks.
• Class notations (all 12 IACS members developing). Autonomous-ready + Remote-Controlled + Smart-Ship notations. Each society has its own current schema — the market waits for a unified IACS UR on MASS notation, expected 2027-2028.

Remote-Operations Centre (ROC)

Degrees 2-3 MASS depend on a shore-based Remote-Operations Centre (ROC) staffed with Remote Operators. The ROC is technically + operationally + regulatorily equivalent to the ship's bridge. Key considerations under development:

• Remote Operator training. STCW II/1 (Officer of the Watch) equivalent is anticipated, but the specific competencies are still under IMO discussion. Simulator training + supervised remote-operations sea-time expected as the base competency framework.
• Watch schedules + fatigue. ROC operators are shore-based but the operation is still 24/7. STCW-equivalent hours-of-rest requirements will apply.
• ROC-per-ship ratio. A ROC operator likely supervises multiple MASS at once (typical planned ratios 3-6 ships per operator). Rules for how many + what type of ships a single operator can safely supervise are yet to be defined.
• Comms link redundancy. Satellite communication redundancy (GEO + LEO + fallback + shore fibre) is essential. Loss-of-communication procedures + safe-return-to-base autonomy is a required capability.
• Emergency scenarios. Fire, flooding, machinery failure — the MASS Code requires how the ROC + emergency response coordinate. Board-and-repair support may require dispatched crew — new operational category.

Current MASS trials + deployments

• Yara Birkeland (Norway). The world's first fully autonomous + electric container ship, entering commercial operation 2022. 120 TEU. Norwegian coastal + fjord routes. Degree 3 operation (no onboard crew) — the market-defining first-of-class.
• Mayflower Autonomous Ship (2022). IBM + ProMare autonomous research vessel. Trans-Atlantic autonomous transit demonstration. Technology proof-of-concept for AI-guided routing.
• DeepSea Voyager (China COSCO, 2023). First commercial-container autonomous voyage in Chinese waters. Trial status — regulatory framework still in development.
• Suzaku (Japan NYK Line, 2022). First unmanned coastal transit of a container ship in Japanese waters, autonomous navigation trial. NYK subsequently ordered autonomous-ready tonnage for delivery 2027-2028.
• Navy + Coast Guard. US Navy DARPA Sea Hunter + UK Royal Navy XV Patrick Blackett + others — the naval sector is running ahead of commercial. Standards + learning transfer expected to influence the MASS Code.
• Short-sea ferry + tug + workboat sector. Multiple European + Japanese short-sea ferry + harbour tug pilot projects (2022-2025). These small-ship applications are likely to inform the initial commercial rollout ahead of deep-sea MASS.

Career implications for working seafarers

• Near-term (2025-2030). MASS is confined to short-sea + coastal + harbour segments. Deep-sea trades continue with full crew. No material impact on existing seafarer careers over the next 5-10 years.
• Medium-term (2030-2040). Reduced-crew (Degree 2) short-sea + coastal deployments become common. Deep-sea trades may see the first Degree 2 MASS around 2035. Onboard crew rank profile shifts — more focus on emergency response + cargo + interface with ROC.
• Long-term (2040+). Deep-sea Degree 3 MASS becomes commercially feasible + widespread. Substantial reshaping of the seafaring labour market — reduced onboard crew demand, shift to shore-based Remote Operator roles. The naval MASS learning curve will substantially inform commercial timing.
• Retraining pathway. Existing STCW Master + Officer + Engineer qualifications will (per current IMO discussions) form the entry-level competency for Remote Operator roles — retraining not from-scratch. Simulator + supervised operations sea-time will augment.
• Labour-market equity. ITF + national seafarer unions have flagged that a shift from onboard crew (labour-exporting countries — Philippines, India, China, Ukraine) to shore-based ROC operators (typically Europe + Japan + South Korea + Singapore) risks a substantial redistribution of maritime employment away from labour-exporting nations. Just-transition considerations are on the IMO + ITF agenda.

Gaps + open questions

• Liability. If an autonomous ship causes a collision, who is liable — the shipowner, the ROC operator, the software vendor, the certification society? Marine insurance + P&I clubs are actively developing coverage frameworks; substantial legal test-cases ahead.
• COLREG interpretation. COLREGs assume "a proper look-out by sight and hearing as well as by all available means" — MASS operations require interpretation of what a "proper look-out" means at Degrees 3-4. IMO discussion ongoing.
• Piracy + hijacking response. A fully-autonomous ship can be more easily boarded than a crewed one. No coordinated boarding-defence framework yet. Piracy insurance + war-risk coverage will substantially impact MASS commercial deployment routes.
• Safe port + safe berth. Charterparty warranties of safe port + safe berth assume a crewed ship. MASS charterparty forms will need substantial redrafting.
• Cybersecurity as existential risk. A remotely-controlled or autonomous ship compromised by cyber attack is a substantially larger risk than a conventional ship. IACS UR E26/E27 is the current baseline but the MASS-specific cyber-security framework is expected to be substantially more demanding.

See also

• · IACS UR catalog · Marine cyber incidents.
• · COLREG.
• · STCW.
• · MEPC 83 GHG Fuel Standard.

Last verified 5 days ago