SOLAS Chapter V Navigation Safety Inspection Checklist
Navigation-safety inspections have a counter-intuitive shape. The items written up most often are not the items that get ships detained, and a master who prepares the bridge by working down a list of the most common findings will spend the most effort on the least dangerous ground. Compiled Paris MoU deficiency data makes the gap plain: nautical publications generate the highest raw number of deficiencies, but charts produce the most detentions outright, and the bridge navigational watch alarm system — only seventh by frequency — converts more than one deficiency in four into a detention. Put another way, a publication out of date is usually a deficiency; a chart out of date is frequently a detention; a BNWAS that does not work is very likely one. This guide reads the bridge the way an inspector does: what the numbers actually say, charts and publications, ECDIS and its specific failure modes, passage planning berth to berth under SOLAS V/34, BNWAS, the equipment and records checklist, the pre-departure tests, and what changed in chapter V for 2026. Start a free trial of Marine Inspection to run bridge checks and hold the navigation records where the inspector asks for them.
SOLAS Chapter VDeficiency frequency plotted against detention rate
The items written up most are not the items that detain ships
Each dot is a navigation deficiency code. Left to right is how often it is recorded. Bottom to top is how often that finding ends in a detention. The two do not correlate, and the top-left corner is where a master should look first.
Deficiency and detention counts by Paris MoU deficiency code, as compiled in published industry analysis. Ratios are calculated from those counts.
Bridge readiness
Check the bridge in the order that matters
Chart and publication status, ECDIS updates, BNWAS testing and passage-plan sign-off tracked per vessel, with the evidence held where the inspector asks for it.
The underlying counts are worth stating plainly, because the ranking changes depending on which column you sort by. Sorted by number of deficiencies, nautical publications lead. Sorted by detentions, charts lead. Sorted by the proportion of findings that become detentions, BNWAS leads by a distance.
BNWAS
26.5%
1,811 deficiencies, 480 detentions. Seventh by frequency, first by consequence. An inoperative or bypassed watch alarm is treated as a fundamental failure of watchkeeping rather than as an equipment defect.
Charts
15.0%
4,110 deficiencies, 615 detentions — more detentions than any other navigation item. The ship cannot safely navigate without correct charts, so the finding goes straight to seaworthiness.
Echo sounder
14.9%
1,075 deficiencies, 160 detentions. Rarely written up, but when it is, it is usually because it does not work at all — and an inspector reads that as navigating without depth information.
VDR
13.0%
2,949 deficiencies, 383 detentions. The annual performance test and a recorder that is actually recording are both checkable in minutes.
ECDIS
9.7%
1,882 deficiencies, 183 detentions. Lower than charts because many ECDIS findings are procedural — settings, training, back-up arrangements — rather than an absence of chart coverage.
Nautical publications
7.8%
5,509 deficiencies, 432 detentions. The most frequently recorded navigation finding, and usually the most easily corrected — which is exactly why it rarely detains.
Lights and shapes
6.5%
5,172 deficiencies, 338 detentions. High volume, low consequence individually, but a pattern of them suggests maintenance is not reaching the deck.
Voyage plan
5.9%
5,046 deficiencies, 296 detentions. Third by frequency. Most findings are about completeness — not berth to berth, no parallel index, no contingency — rather than about a missing plan.
The practical conclusion for a master
Prepare in order of consequence, not order of frequency. Prove the BNWAS works and is not bypassed. Prove chart coverage and correction for the whole intended voyage including contingencies. Prove the echo sounder and VDR function. Only then work down the publication list — which is the item most likely to be written up and least likely to stop the ship.
Charts and publications: the biggest detention source
SOLAS V/27 requires nautical charts and publications necessary for the intended voyage to be adequate and up to date. Two words in that sentence do the work: adequate, meaning the right scale and coverage for what you are actually doing, and up to date, meaning corrected to the latest notices at the time of use.
Coverage for the whole voyage, including contingencies
Berth to berth, plus ports of refuge, diversion routes and any area the ship could reasonably end up in. A plan that stops at the pilot station is a plan that stops short of the requirement.
Correct scale for the phase of the voyage
Using a small-scale passage chart for pilotage waters is an adequacy failure even if every correction has been applied. Inspectors check the largest-scale chart available for the approach, not just that a chart exists.
Corrections applied and traceable
A correction log showing which notices have been applied, to which charts, by whom and when. The log is checked against a sample of charts, so entries that do not match the chart are worse than a gap in the log.
Temporary and preliminary notices
T and P notices are routinely missed because they do not produce a visible chart change. They are part of being up to date, and inspectors know where to look.
Navigational warnings in force
NAVAREA and coastal warnings relevant to the voyage, received, read and reflected in the plan. Receipt is not enough; the plan has to show the warning was acted on.
Publications current and complete
Sailing directions, lists of lights and radio signals, tide tables and the mandatory publications for the trade, each at the current edition with supplements. This is the most frequently recorded finding of all, and the easiest to prevent.
ECDIS: the failures that actually get recorded
ECDIS findings are rarely about the equipment failing. They are about how it is set up, maintained and used — which is why they are procedural, and why they are so often found by an inspector asking the officer of the watch to demonstrate something.
1
Cell permits expired or coverage incomplete. Licences lapsing mid-voyage, or a route that runs off the licensed cells. The system will tell you; someone has to look.
2
Updates not applied. Weekly updates downloaded but not loaded, or loaded to one unit and not the other. Check the update status on both displays, not the one you usually use.
3
Software version out of date. ECDIS software and the presentation library need maintaining to the current standard. An out-of-date presentation library can display newer chart features incorrectly, which is a safety issue rather than an administrative one.
4
Safety settings not matched to the ship or the voyage. Safety depth, safety contour, shallow and deep contours and the alarm settings for the actual draught and under-keel clearance policy. Default settings left from installation are a standard finding.
5
Back-up arrangements not proven. Whether the back-up is a second ECDIS or a folio of paper charts, it has to be adequate and available. A second unit fed from the same single power source is not independent.
6
Type-specific training not evidenced. Generic ECDIS training plus familiarisation with the actual equipment fitted. Inspectors ask an officer to perform a task, and hesitation on a specific unit is what exposes the gap.
7
Route check not run, or alarms overridden. The automatic route check is one of the few things ECDIS does that paper never could. Running it and acting on what it reports is part of planning, not a formality.
8
Manual position fixing abandoned entirely. Independent cross-checking of position by a second means remains good practice and is expected. An officer who cannot fix without the ECDIS is a finding waiting to happen.
Evidence, not recollection
The bridge findings that detain are all provable in advance
BNWAS test records, chart and ECDIS update status, passage plans signed berth to berth and pre-departure test results — captured on the bridge and visible across the fleet before arrival.
SOLAS V/34 requires the voyage to be planned using appropriate charts and publications for the intended voyage, and IMO resolution A.893(21) sets out the structure every inspector expects to see. The four stages are not a paperwork sequence — each one produces something the plan must contain.
The four stages and what each must produce
1
AppraisalAll information relevant to the voyage gathered: charts and publications, routeing guides, navigational warnings, weather and tidal data, ship’s draught and manoeuvring characteristics, and any company or charterer requirements. This is the stage most often skipped on a short notice fixture, and every later gap traces back to it.
2
PlanningThe detailed plan laid down berth to berth with courses, distances, wheel-over positions, no-go areas, abort points and contingency anchorages, under-keel clearance at each stage, parallel index and clearing bearings, and the reporting points and VTS requirements for the route.
3
ExecutionThe plan briefed to the bridge team, adjusted for the conditions actually met — expected tides, traffic, weather, ETA adjustments — and any change recorded rather than made silently. A plan altered underway without a record looks, afterwards, like no plan at all.
4
MonitoringPosition fixed by the methods the plan specifies, at the intervals it specifies, with independent cross-checks. Deviations identified and acted on. The record of monitoring is what demonstrates the plan was used rather than filed.
BNWAS: the highest-consequence finding on the bridge
It is expected to be in operation
The system exists to detect an incapacitated watchkeeper. Found switched off at sea, or with the mode selector in a setting that defeats it, it is read as watchkeeping failure rather than as an equipment defect — which is why the detention ratio is what it is.
Bypasses are the worst finding of all
A taped motion sensor, a disconnected buzzer, a reset button rigged where it can be reached from a chair. These are found, they are recorded, and they colour everything else in the inspection.
Test it and write it down
Functional test on a schedule covering the dormant period, the first-stage alarm on the bridge, the second stage to the officer’s cabin and the third to other officers. Record each stage tested, not just that the system works.
Access control matters
Operational mode selection and the dormant period should be under the master’s control and not adjustable by the watchkeeper at will. An open selector is an invitation and an inspector knows it.
The bridge checklist: equipment, function and record
Item
What is checked
The record that supports it
Charts
Adequate scale and coverage for the whole intended voyage including contingencies; corrections applied
Chart correction log traceable to notices, matching a sample of the charts themselves
Nautical publications
Current editions with supplements, complete for the trade
Publication list with edition and correction status
ECDIS
Cell permits valid, updates applied on both units, software and presentation library current, safety settings matched to the ship
Update log, licence status, software version record, and type-specific training evidence per officer
ECDIS back-up
Independent back-up adequate and available, not sharing a single point of failure
Arrangement described in the SMS and demonstrated on request
Passage plan
Berth to berth, with no-go areas, abort points, contingencies, UKC and parallel index
Plan approved by the master, briefed to the team, and annotated where changed
BNWAS
Operational, not bypassed, mode and dormant period under master’s control, all alarm stages working
Functional test record covering each stage, with dates
VDR
Recording, within its annual performance test, data retrievable
Annual performance test certificate and evidence of the last data check
Magnetic compass
Deviation card current, compass adjusted, records maintained
Deviation card and compass observation book with regular entries
Gyro compass and repeaters
Aligned, repeaters synchronised, errors recorded
Compass error observations logged on a routine basis
Echo sounder
Operational, reading correctly, recording where required
Function noted in bridge checks; defects raised as jobs
Radar and AIS
Both radars functioning, AIS data correct including draught, cargo and destination
AIS static data verified on departure; radar performance checks recorded
Lights, shapes and sound signals
All navigation lights operational with spares, shapes available, whistle working
Main and auxiliary tested, remote controls, alarms, rudder angle indicators, full rudder movement
Pre-departure test record within 12 hours of sailing; emergency steering drill records
Bridge visibility
View from the conning position unobstructed, windows clear, blind sectors known
Blind sector diagram available and consistent with the current loading condition
Pre-departure tests that inspectors ask about
Steering gear, within twelve hours of departure. Main and auxiliary steering gear, remote control systems, the bridge steering positions, the emergency power supply, rudder angle indicators and the associated alarms, with the rudder moved through its full travel. The record is checked, so it needs a time as well as a date.
Emergency steering drills at intervals. Including operation from the steering compartment and the communications arrangement with the bridge. Crews that have never done it in the dark find out at the wrong moment.
AIS static data checked on every departure. Draught, cargo type, destination and ETA. Wrong AIS data is easily seen from ashore and suggests nobody is checking anything.
Navigation light failure alarm proven. Not just that the lights burn, but that the ship will know when one does not.
Bridge equipment checklist completed and signed. Before departure and before arrival, by the officer who actually did it.
Master and pilot exchange. Documented, with the pilot card and the agreed plan for the pilotage, including any departure from the ship’s own plan.
What changed in chapter V for 2026
Container loss reporting
Regulations V/31.2 and V/32.3 establish reporting procedures for containers lost at sea, covering detection, position and tracking, with responsibilities defined for the master, the operator and the Administration. It applies to all ships from 1 January 2026, so the procedure should already be in the SMS.
Electronic inclinometer
Containerships and bulk carriers of 3,000 GT and above constructed on or after 1 January 2026 must carry an electronic inclinometer connected to the voyage data recorder. This applies to new ships only — there is no retrofit obligation on existing tonnage under this amendment.
What has not changed
Everything else on this page. Charts, publications, passage planning, BNWAS and the pre-departure tests are unchanged, and they remain where the detentions come from.
Frequently asked questions
Which navigation deficiency causes the most detentions?
Charts. Compiled Paris MoU data shows charts producing more detentions than any other navigation item — 615 detentions from 4,110 deficiencies — because inadequate or uncorrected charts go directly to whether the ship can safely navigate.
Which deficiency is most likely to detain if found?
BNWAS, by a wide margin. Around 480 detentions from 1,811 deficiencies, which is more than one in four. A watch alarm switched off or bypassed is treated as a watchkeeping failure rather than an equipment fault.
What must a passage plan cover?
The whole voyage berth to berth, following the four stages in IMO resolution A.893(21): appraisal, planning, execution and monitoring. It should include courses and distances, wheel-over positions, no-go areas, abort points and contingency anchorages, under-keel clearance, parallel index and clearing bearings, and reporting and VTS requirements.
What are the common ECDIS findings?
Expired cell permits or incomplete coverage, updates downloaded but not applied, out-of-date software or presentation library, safety settings left at defaults instead of matched to the ship, back-up arrangements that are not genuinely independent, and missing type-specific training evidence for the equipment actually fitted.
When must steering gear be tested before departure?
Within twelve hours of departure, covering main and auxiliary steering gear, remote control systems, bridge steering positions, the emergency power supply, rudder angle indicators and the associated alarms, with the rudder moved through its full travel. Record the time as well as the date.
Do paper charts still matter on an ECDIS ship?
Where paper is the back-up arrangement, yes — and it must be adequate and corrected for the intended voyage. Where a second ECDIS is the back-up, it has to be genuinely independent, which means not sharing a single power supply or position source with the primary.
What does “adequate and up to date” mean for charts?
Adequate means the right scale and coverage for the phase of the voyage — the largest-scale chart available for pilotage waters, not a passage chart. Up to date means corrected to the latest notices at the time of use, including temporary and preliminary notices, with a correction log that matches the charts themselves.
How should a master prepare the bridge for inspection?
In order of consequence rather than frequency. Prove the BNWAS works and is not bypassed, prove chart adequacy and correction for the whole voyage, prove the echo sounder and VDR function, confirm the passage plan is berth to berth and signed, then work down the publications. The most common finding is the least likely to stop the ship.
Before the next port
Put the high-consequence checks at the top of the round
BNWAS stage testing, chart and ECDIS update status, passage-plan approval and pre-departure tests recorded on the bridge, with a fleet view of what is outstanding before arrival.
