Skip to content
You can now search across every topic, entity and event.What's new
Autonomous Systems: Land & Sea
29MAY

Crewless-ship rules duck the hard part

2 min read
08:47UTC

The IMO's MASS Code is set to enter force on 1 July, yet seafarer union Nautilus International says three structural questions, liability, multi-vessel safety and jobs, remain unanswered when it does.

TechnologyDeveloping
Key takeaway

The crewless-ship rulebook takes effect on 1 July with liability for a master ashore still unwritten.

The International Maritime Organization's Maritime Autonomous Surface Ships (MASS) Code is set to enter force on 1 July 2026, opening its Experience Building Phase 1. The Code is the first global framework for cargo ships that sense, navigate and steer with reduced crews or none aboard, adopted in London in May . It is also a framework that takes effect with the questions it was meant to settle still open.

Nautilus International, the seafarer union, names three gaps that the Code leaves open 2. On liability, "the Code keeps a human master legally responsible but does not say who answers when that master sits ashore and something goes wrong," said David Appleton, the union's head of professional and technical. On safety, nobody has shown that one master can safely supervise several vessels at once, the watchkeeping model the Code permits. On jobs, shore control rooms create new roles while threatening to displace higher-paid sea-going officers with cheaper operators on land.

What takes effect on 1 July is a procedural milestone over an unresolved core question. A code that keeps a master legally responsible without allocating liability for a remote one leaves a defined accountability hole, and that hole gets filled by whoever has to price the risk. Classification societies including DNV and Lloyd's Register are already running parallel assurance frameworks alongside the Code, and the courts will eventually settle the remote-master liability the regulation chose not to define.

Deep Analysis

In plain English

The MASS Code (Maritime Autonomous Surface Ships Code) sets rules for ships that can navigate without a full crew, or even without any crew at all, aboard. The International Maritime Organization (IMO), a United Nations agency based in London, adopted it in May 2026. On 1 July 2026, the Code is scheduled to enter force. Three structural problems arrive with it, still unresolved: First, liability: if a ship goes wrong and its master is sitting in a control room on shore rather than on the ship, the law is currently unclear about who is legally responsible. Second, safety evidence: no one has yet proved that one shore-based master can safely supervise several ships at once. Third, jobs: shore-based control rooms require fewer staff than crewed ships, so the industry shift could displace well-paid seafaring officers. Classification societies such as DNV (Norwegian) and Lloyd's Register (British) certify that ships meet safety standards. Both are developing their own parallel frameworks to fill the gaps the Code left open.

Deep Analysis
Root Causes

The three unresolved MASS Code gaps share one structural origin: the IMO consensus process requires broad flag-state agreement, and the states most dependent on crewed seafarer labour (the Philippines, Indonesia, India) negotiated provisions that preserved the master-aboard requirement as a default, leaving the remote-master model as an opt-in that individual flag states must enable domestically.

MASS Code adoption therefore did not create a uniform international framework: a vessel registered in a flag state that has not updated its domestic maritime law to enable remote masters cannot operate without crew under the Code even after 1 July. The liability question remains unresolved at the IMO level and at an uneven stage of domestic implementation across the 175 member states.

First Reported In

Update #4 · Allied robot minehunters reach the Gulf

Nautilus International· 24 Jun 2026
Read original
Different Perspectives
China (military commentary)
China (military commentary)
Chinese military commentary has called uncrewed maritime equipment 'an excellent force multiplier' that cannot overturn the fundamental logic of naval warfare, the lone voice against the Western consensus that autonomy is the central axis of naval modernisation. Beijing reads the airdrop trial as an incremental logistics fix, not London's claimed doctrinal breakthrough.
Iran (Ministry of Foreign Affairs)
Iran (Ministry of Foreign Affairs)
Spokesman Kazem Gharibabadi said clearance of the Hormuz mines is 'Iran's sole responsibility', rejecting the Omani-authorised allied mine-clearance mission as a jurisdictional dispute rather than a technical favour. Tehran has not ratified UNCLOS, the treaty that would otherwise settle transit-passage rights through the strait.
Norway (Kongsberg Discovery)
Norway (Kongsberg Discovery)
Kongsberg Discovery's Camilla Kiss said the subsea-protection contract shows the industry 'moving from recognising the need to implementing solutions', selling fused sonar and C-Scope software to an unnamed buyer because fragmented cable, pipeline and platform ownership means no single navy commissions this the way it commissions a warship.
Ukraine (Trinity Robotics)
Ukraine (Trinity Robotics)
Trinity Robotics doubled its Konyk One production target to 2,200 units and opened French joint-venture talks, co-founder Oleksii Konik said, because wartime demand outpaces what factories inside a live-fire war zone can safely hold. Ukraine is answering the authority gap other actors face by manufacturing around it.
United Kingdom (Ministry of Defence and Royal Navy)
United Kingdom (Ministry of Defence and Royal Navy)
The Royal Navy proved it can airdrop a mine-hunting robot from any A400M into Sea State 4 waters, working round a front line of just six Type 45 destroyers and eight Type 23/26 frigates rather than waiting for more hulls. First Sea Lord Gwyn Jenkins's 'uncrewed wherever possible' doctrine gets a delivery method; it still lacks a named operational deployment.
Nautilus International
Nautilus International
Nautilus International pressed the unresolved liability gaps as the MASS Code entered force, noting a master stays legally responsible without saying who answers when ashore. Entry into force changed nothing an operator may legally do, leaving the seafarer-displacement question open.