Feature 3 | CRUISE UPDATE Raising the standard
Even before the investigation into Costa Concordia’s accident in Italy in January is complete questions over the efficacy of the regulatory regime are already being asked.
C
osta Concordia’s accident is still under investigation but questions are already being raised regarding
safety management, and whether further changes to issues like safe return to port requirements or damage stability and ship design need to be considered in the light of the report’s findings. While the passenger ship safety
regulatory developments have reflected the lessons learned from casualties, starting with the development of SOLAS following the sinking of Titanic 100 years ago, what will be the impact of the Costa Concordia incident? Lloyd’s Register’s (LR) vice president
for passenger ships John Hicks says: “Te lessons from casualties are vital, but science and technology advance constantly, as do the statutory requirements. Analysis techniques and other investigations, which were not possible to be calculated many years ago, are now possible, hence the move to so called ‘goal based’ approaches and away from prescriptive rules. Tis has also prompted the move from deterministic to probabilistic requirements.” However, Hicks believes that any
conclusions about Costa Concordia that are made now would be premature. “We need to wait for the conclusions of
authoritative investigations into Costa Concordia before making any decisions about the regulatory regime.” Nevertheless, Hicks says: “LR will support
the implementation of any further changes to international safety regulation. Trough IACS [International Association of Classification Societies], we will support the development of an appropriate implementation method for any new policy, and an appropriate assessment regime.” He went on to point out: “Te EU has
funded several research projects in recent years to contribute to the consideration of the various systems and components involved in the safety of passenger ships. LR has contributed to many of these projects. Examples include GOALDS, SAFEDOR, SAFECRAFTS, SAFEGUARD, MONALISA, FLOODSTAND, and HARDER. “From these studies and others, two
likely future areas of concentrated effort will include: the goal based standard model and how this can be developed and used in creating the regulatory framework of the future and human element studies to further understand this complex yet key component in overall operation and function of all ships.” Built in 2006, Costa Concordia, unlike
those ships built from 2010 onwards, was built to prescriptive rules, so one argument
could be that new regulations have already been put into force. Hicks points to probabilistic damage
stability and safe return to port which are innovations that have recently entered into force to further reduce the risks involved in operating passenger ships. “How ships are operated is as important
as how they are designed and constructed – perhaps more so.” Te International Management Code for
the Safe Operation of Ships and for Pollution Prevention (International Safety Management (ISM Code) is a key piece of regulation. According to Hicks: “Lloyd’s Register
believes that the most significant reductions in risk at sea will now be found in managing the human element – across ship operations but also in design. Tis is an area of increased importance to LR and we have considerable capabilities in human factors. Technological and regulatory approaches to improving safety will continue – and they should.” Helping ensure that there are properly
trained and experienced seafarers in place, as well as professional and experienced managers with external verification of performance coupled with the existence of an effective management culture with common understanding and goals shared between ship and shore are vital, he believes.
Ships, such as Queen Elizabeth below, that were built from 2010 onwards used the probabilistic rather than deterministic rules for their design (see GA Plan).
58
The Naval Architect May 2012
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 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80