Release hook guidelines raise questions
Aſter years of dithering, IMO has finally come up with guidelines for the design and maintenance of lifeboat release hooks. While welcomed by LSA manufacturers, Schat-Harding has questioned whether these guidelines go far enough.
framework of guidelines governing the design and maintenance of on-load lifeboat release hooks. At the 89th meeting of the body’s Maritime Safety Committee (MSC) in May, a clear set of guidelines were unveiled under MSC.1./Circ.1392. Remarkably, MSC 89 marked the first time
T
that guidelines for on-load release hooks – now dubbed ‘lifeboat release and retrieval systems’ – have been approved, although these product types have been available for 25 years. Te guidelines are now set to become mandatory under Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS) and will apply to new boats from 1 July 2014. Vessels carrying existing lifeboat release and retrieval systems will have to test their hooks and, should they fail to meet the set standards, will have to upgrade these hooks at their first drydock aſter the deadline. As reported in Ship & Boat International
March / April 2011 (page 14), lifeboat service provider Schat-Harding was vociferous in calling for an industry consensus on, and the establishment of basic requirements for, on-load lifeboat release hooks. Frustration has now led to a feeling
of vindication. In a statement issued by Schat-Harding following MSC 89, David Torres, VP for sales, commented: “The approval of these guidelines has been a long
he International Maritime Organization (IMO) has finally made a move in setting out a
time coming, and we welcome their adoption in the best interests of preserving the safety of life at sea.” Torres also claimed that his company
is matching IMO in adopting the ‘lifeboat release and retrieval systems’ terminology, in order to give itself more scope when considering the development of new systems - some of which may prove to be more effective than hook-based systems in boosting crew safety when attempting to deploy lifeboats. However, he added, such alternatives may be shortcoming “in the foreseeable future”.
Double standards? However, Torres also highlighted the fact that the guidelines do not lay down prescriptive rules on ‘secondary safety systems’ (SSS; items which could include pins, for instance). Similarly, IMO has not laid down clear-cut standards on fall prevention devices (FPDs) for either new or upgraded lifeboat release hooks. The ‘FPD’ tag covers all interim devices used by shipowners under MSC.1 / Circ.1327 until their hooks have been tested and approved, or replaced with compliant hooks. For sure, the marine industry may be able
to draw up its own guidelines on SSS and FPDs, but Torres expressed his concern that, in doing so, shipowners and operators may be leſt facing a confusing mixture of standards and different products on the market. “We
would prefer if IMO and industry had one set position and [we] would then produce one hook range to meet that standard,” he stated. “Adding complication to hooks increases the possibility of mechanical or human failure.” In order to meet this potential scenario two global standards, Schat-Harding
of
will design an optional SSS, in the form of a training lock, to complement its SeaCure LHR hook range. However, the company has claimed that it is “not in a position to supply FPDs until there are design and operational criteria guidelines available from IMO.” For Torres at least, the unveiling of the
guidelines also raises one particular concern, related to the availability and supply of hooks. He noted: “We have to test hooks in
service by 1 July 2013 and we have to have new systems ready for new boats, or boats requiring replacement hooks, by 1 July 2014. We then face a window for replacements to older boats and non-compliant systems, which depends on drydock dates and could run until 2019. We also have to have in place the trained manpower to install these hooks on ships in service. It is very rare for an IMO regulation to be made retrospective, so we cannot be sure how this will pan out.” However, while a number of owners and
operators have already begun to order ‘future proof’ hooks, well in advance of the deadline, there is the certainty that some parties will leave these upgrades to the last minute. SBI
Markusnet Type MS is designed for man overboard recovery on all types of ships, offshore installations and dams with less than 40 metre height from water level upto rescue deck or platform.
Hvaleyrarbraut 3 Markus MOB boat rescue-net
Hafnarfjordur, IS-220 Iceland
Tel: +354 5651375 Fax: +354 5651376
Main partners:
UK: Energy Marine Ltd. Tel: +44 (0)1525 851234
USA: Marine Rescue Technologies Inc. Tel: +1 772 388 1326
Markus Scramble-net
Markus Scramble net Type SCN6 is a mobile light weight scramble-net / cradle recovery system for deck vessels and offshore installations with either rail or special fastenings inside bulwark where they are to be used. Less than 1/6 of the weight of traditional scramble-nets.
Markus MOB boat rescue-net is light, quick fastening, takes little space, provides easy and fast method to place the casualty in the net, is soft but firm around the casualty, provides easy lift by one or two persons and is easy to repack after use.
info@markuslifenet.com —
www.markuslifenet.com Man overboard safety and rescue is our concern and speciality Ship & Boat International July/August 2011 45 Markusnet Type: MS
Feature 3
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64