S-100 is not a standard; it is a format for describing spatial data. Using it, the IHO develops and proposes for implementation various standards for different data types. For ENC, the S-101 standard is proposed, which is intended to replace S-57. Furthermore, in addition to S-101, it is proposed to use S-102 – a standard for high-density bathymetric data – and the S-129 standard for presenting high-density depth contours – under keel clearance. Collectively, it is planned to combine the aforementioned information within the Interoperability model, which is described using S-98.

All of the above presents a serious challenge for National Maritime Administrations, as it requires a significant increase in budgets and personnel. At the same time, a number of questions arise, the answers to which cast doubt on the feasibility and effectiveness of implementing new hydrographic standards.

So far, it is unclear how to use the aggregate of S-100 data for solving safety tasks in ECDIS, as there are no corresponding IEC technical regulations. Until they appear, it is practically impossible to talk about a rational policy for producing S-100 data – producing data without understanding how they will be used is pointless.

According to current international standards, only ENC in two formats, S-57 and S-101, are equivalents of paper charts and are permitted for use in ECDIS, with ENC in S-57 format required to meet the requirements of the S-58 standard, and ENC in S-101 format required to meet the S-158 standard. Data in S-102 and S-129 formats are not equivalents of paper charts and cannot be used in ECDIS.

Thus, the IHO demands that national hydrographic offices produce data in the new S-100 formats, but cannot explain how this data should and will be used. These issues are examined in more detail in articles and presentations on our website www.dkart.fi. On the other hand, S-100 leaves sufficient room for National Maritime Administrations to implement their own policy for the production and distribution of navigational publications in electronic form, so we see our mission regarding S-100 standards as follows:

• To help HOs understand the S-100 phenomenon;
• To propose effective technology;
• To provide support and maintenance;

For this purpose, we use the following tools within our new dKart Evolution technology:

• Artificial Intelligence.
• Universal information repositories.
• Data quality and integrity control tools.
• Automation of production processes.
• Modern management systems.

Collectively, this allows for a transition to a new, more efficient production system, ensuring compliance with the requirements of new and current standards quickly, simply, and without significant costs.

S-57 coincides with S-101 by more than 95%, while their parallel production and maintenance to modern levels is a very complex and expensive process. Why can't S-57 be used within the S-100 interoperability model?

Why is interoperability needed for compiling ENC from different components? It is complex, expensive, and inconvenient. It is much easier to prepare ENC as a single, integral product that meets all necessary requirements and standards.

What requirements and standards must the combination of S-101, S-102, and S-129 data meet? The same as for ENC? If yes, then how to achieve this? If not, then this combination is not an ENC and cannot be used in ECDIS. In the latter case, doubts arise regarding the compliance of S-100 interoperability with SOLAS requirements.

Question – does the combination of S-102 and S-129 with S-101 using the interoperability model and the S-98 standard constitute a paper chart equivalent for use in ECDIS?

Answer – no, it does not, as no formal requirements or documents on this matter exist. Likewise, any other combinations of this data do not meet the requirements for official ENCs.