Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 52
2 M arine E ngineers R eview (I ndia ) August 2013 w w w

2 Marine Engineers R eview (I ndia ) August 2013

www.imare.in

M arine E ngineers R eview (I ndia ) August 2013 w w w .
4 M arine E ngineers R eview (I ndia ) August 2013 w w w

4 Marine Engineers R eview (I ndia ) August 2013

www.imare.in

c ontents

M arine e ngineers r eview (i ndia ) Journal of The Institute of Marine

Marine engineers review (india)

Journal of The Institute of Marine Engineers (India)

Administration Office IMEI House Plot No. 94, Sector - 19, Nerul, Navi Mumbai 400 706.

Tel. : +91 22 2770 16 64 Fax : +91 22 2771 16 63 E-mail : editormer@imare.in website : www.imare.in

AUGUST 2013

Editorial Board Indra Nath Bose, S. K. Bhalla, J. K. Dhar, J. K. M. Nair

Editorial Assistant and Website Coordinator Meenu Bhalla

Editor : Indra Nath Bose

Email : editormer@imare.in

Disclaimer :

Papers and articles have been included in this Journal largely as submitted, with basic editing and formatting only, and without technical peer review. The Institute of Marine Engineers (India) does not take any responsibility whatsoever for any statements and claims made in these papers and articles for the quality, accuracy and validity of data presented or for any other contents. Inclusion of papers, articles, and advertisements does not constitute any form of endorsement whatsoever by The Institute of Marine Engineers (India).

Editorial

7

IMEI News

8

Branch News

10

Obituary

13

News

15

Titanic and the ISM code

23

Preliminary Report of MSC92

28

MLC beyond DMLC

31

Spectacles in the bilges!

33

Groundings

35

Installation Of Energy Saving Devices For The Improvement Of Propulsion Efficiency

47

Contact Details Of Branches & Chapters

BANGALORE : Tel. : 080-41213781 E-mail : bangluru@imare.in

cHENNAI : Tel. : 044-28512733 E-mail : imeichennai@gmail.com

DELHI : Tel. : 011-41660109 / 41660110 Fax: 011-26162857 E-mail: imeidelhi@gmail.com

GOA : Tel. : 0832-2520986 • Fax : 0832-2524063 E-mail : imaregoa@gmail.com

GUJARAT : Tel : 02836-232123 • Fax : 02836-231812 E-mail : vermaashok674@gmail.com

HYDERABAD : Tel. : 040-2307717, 2337 2118 E-mail : hyderabad@imare.in

KOcHI : Tel: 0484 2302491 Cell: 9388609429 Fax: 0484 2302491 E-mail: imcochin@ sify.com

KOLKATA : Tel.: 91-33-24987805 E-mail:imeikol@yahoo.co.in

MUMBAI : Tel. : 022 - 2285 1195 • Fax : 2285 1195 E-mail : mumbai@imare.in

NAVI MUMBAI : Tel. : 022 - 2789 2524 / 5591 2233 Fax : 2790 2234 / 2789 2529 E-mail : navi.mumbai@imare.in

NERUL TRAINING cENTRE : Tel. 022-27711663, 27701664, 27706749 E-mail : training@imare.in

PATNA : Tel : 0612-2683186 E-mail : singhrg@yahoo.com

PUNE : Tel. : 020 3290 3233, 2426 1679, 2426 9783 Fax : 020-56016304 E-mail : pune@imare.in

VISAKHAPTNAM : Tel. : 0891-2725090 E-mail : imeivizag@gmail.com

Printed, Published and Edited by Mr. Indra Nath Bose on behalf of The Institute of Marine Engineers (India). Published from 1012 Maker Chambers V, 221 Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400 021, and Printed from Compact Photo Offset, 116 “Shriniwas”, Behind Gograswadi, Dombivli (E) – 421 201. District Thane

6 M arine E ngineers R eview (I ndia ) August 2013 w w w

6 Marine Engineers R eview (I ndia ) August 2013

www.imare.in

From the Editors Keyboard

From the Editors Keyboard D r C P Srivastava, Secretary General Emeritus of the International Maritime

D r C P Srivastava, Secretary General Emeritus of the International

Maritime Organization, passed away on 22nd July in Italy, at the age of 93. His contribution to Indian and international maritime affairs is immeasurable. Much of the sound international maritime policies that we see today are due to his inspirational leadership and vision at IMO. He served as Secretary General of IMO between 1974 and 1989 and reshaped it significantly for the betterment of the maritime industry which impacts our daily lives today. He created World Maritime University in Malmo and Technical Co- operation Programme at IMO for capacity building in maritime affairs in developing countries not endowed with expertise in that field. During his tenure many major Conventions and Codes were adopted at IMO significant among those were STCW Convention, SAR Convention, SUA Convention etc. At home prior to joining IMO as head of The Shipping Corporation of India Ltd. he had turned it into one of the largest shipping companies in the world with a much diversified fleet. After his retirement from IMO he served as Chairman of Indian Register of Shipping for 4 years during which time IRS was inducted as Associate Member of IACS.

Last month another illustrious shipping professional Mr B L Mahta passed away at the age of 78. A Fellow Member and founder Office Bearer of our Institute he was a true techno-commercial man and had developed and expanded fleet of several ship owning companies in India with his vision and capability.

MER pays homage to the departed souls.

Since past one year or so we have been witnessing vessels of financially troubled shipping companies stranded around Mumbai, Chennai and some overseas ports. The crew of these vessels had not been paid their wages and had no provisions on board. The vessel owners had no money to repatriate the crew from vessels in overseas ports.

Instances of abandonment of crew are not restricted to India alone but are a worldwide problem given the dire straight

the shipping industry is in now. It is not

a new problem but happens sporadically

with insolvent owners. Also, in percentage terms these may be considered minor in relation to world shipping with around 1.5 million seafarers. However, the very fact that it happens at all is something that needs to be addressed.

It is very possible that shipowners struggling with insolvency hardly believe they are capable of abandoning crews and depriving honest workers of their wages, but feel that fate - rather than their own decisions - has somehow left them with no choice.

Abandonment of seafarers generate

front-page stories in the press, not just at regional level but nationally too which creates an image of an uncaring industry, one that does not look after its workers.

It shows the shipping industry in a pretty

bad light and acts as a deterrent to drawing talent to the seafaring profession.

When a crew on a merchant ship has been abandoned, there is very often a depressingly familiar pattern of things that start happening. They run out of fuel for generators, sometimes even food and water too. The shipowner stops answering his phone and cannot be traced. The onboard wage payment stops. The mood sinks.

Seafarers who want nothing more than to work and earn an honest wage are left begging for handouts in order to survive. Many simply don’t want to go home without the wages they are owed as they don’t want to disappoint their families.

Abandonment is often a calculated economic decision by a shipowner facing bankruptcy, insolvency or arrest of its vessel by creditors. In many cases, vessels are abandoned after they are detained by port state control as unseaworthy.

To date there is little recourse, short of arresting the ship to recover seafarers’ unpaid wages.

Against this background, regulators have been looking at issues of seafarer welfare within an international framework. The ILO Maritime Labour Convention, which comes into force on 20th of this month contains many provisions that should help prevent situations of abandonment but not quite.

MLC does name in its Standard A2.5 some responsibilities to the seafarer on the part of owners, stating plainly that in cases of abandonment, seafarers are repatriated at no cost to themselves, but also that shipowners shall provide financial security for “liabilities contained in the Standard”.

Protection and Indemnity Clubs have accepted the responsibility for repatriation

- and club boards, according to a recent

UK P&I Club circular, agreed they would provide repatriation cover for insolvency risks on a non-poolable basis.

According to the UK P&I Club circular - there is no requirement in the MLC 2006 to provide financial security by way of insurance cover for unpaid wages.

However, the provision of financial security for potentially unpaid wages, a liability which is harder to quantify and thus harder to insure, is an even more complicated matter. That is why the issue was not fully resolved by the ILO Diplomatic Conference which adopted the MLC in 2006.

In the meantime, however, both the ILO and the International Maritime Organization

- with the full support of employers and

unions - have agreed additional principles concerning the provision of financial security which, in the case of bankruptcy, should be sufficient to cover outstanding seafarers’ entitlements, including accrued wages. These principles will be discussed at an ILO meeting in Geneva next April and necessary amendment to MLC will be adopted in due course heralding a new era in protecting seafarers against abandonment.

I. N. Bose Hon Editor - MERI editormer@imare.in

I. N. Bose Hon Editor - MERI editormer@imare.in M arine E ngineers R eview (I ndia

IMEI News

Maritime Piracy Humanitarian Response Programme (MPHRP) & IMEI

A n international pan-industry alliance of ship owners, maritime unions, managers, manning

agents, insurers and welfare associations has come together to establish the “Maritime Piracy Humanitarian Response Programme” (MPHRP). The objectives of this programme address the three phases of "pre, during and post incident", with the aim of implementing a model of assisting seafarers and their families with the humanitarian aspects of a traumatic incident caused by a piracy attack, armed robbery or being taken hostage.

MPHRP South Asia has been actively supporting Seafarers and their families who are affected due to piracy incidents. Mr Chirag Bahri is the Regional Director for the programme and is supported by partners namely INSA, MASSA, FOSMA, IMEI, GL, MUI, FSUI. The Programme Steering Group (India) is chaired by Shri M.P.Pinto, Ex Secretary, Ministry of Shipping. MPHRP South Asia is

Ex Secretary, Ministry of Shipping. MPHRP South Asia is MPHRP training at Pune MPHRP at Nerul

MPHRP training at Pune

of Shipping. MPHRP South Asia is MPHRP training at Pune MPHRP at Nerul MPHRP film at

MPHRP at Nerul

MPHRP South Asia is MPHRP training at Pune MPHRP at Nerul MPHRP film at Nerul funded

MPHRP film at Nerul

funded by the generous grants from ITF Seafarers trust, Seafarers UK Charity and Teekay Foundation. Chirag Bahri incidentally is a marine engineer.

MPHRP has been actively involved with CGPCS (Contact Group of Piracy off the coast of Somalia) a working group which is a UN initiative. MPHRP is also closely working with Ocean Beyond Piracy and International Maritime Bureau (IMB) and have recently published the Human Cost of Piracy report. There are more than 30 international partners who are supporting MPHRP. It includes INTERTANKO, BIMCO, INTERCARGO, IMEC, ITF, ISF, IMB, IMO, ILO, UKMTO, NATO NSC, ICMA, ISWAN among others. MPHRP has recently launched Maritime Piracy Humanitarian Response Fund. This fund will help in small but effective grants to Seafarers and families for expenses such as: medical care, counselling, school fees, daily amenities etc.

Considering the importance of this work, especially the humane side of piracy, The Institute of Marine Engineers (India) has signed a MOU with MPHRP for supporting its activities. With active support of IMEI three Train the Trainer courses were held at Pune, Mumbai and Chennai where many Faculty members from training institutes and training managers of shipping companies participated. IMEI also sponsored the film shows on

piracy at Delhi, Mumbai and Chennai.

the film shows on piracy at Delhi, Mumbai and Chennai. 8 M arine E ngineers R

8 Marine Engineers R eview (I ndia ) August 2013

www.imare.in

IMEI News

IME(I) Elections-2013 Update

 

Opening of the sealed ballot box and counting of votes by the Scrutinizing Committee, both for all India and branches will be carried out on 24th AUGUST, 2013, commencing at 1000 hrs in conference room of IMEI Head office in Nerul in the presence of those who have indicated their desire to do so. It is expected that counting will last up to 4 to 6 hours.

Members, who wish to witness the counting, must send their name with Membership Number to the Election Officer by letter addressed at the Administration of the Head office at IME(I) House, Plot no. 94, Sector 19, Nerul East, Navi Mumbai 400 706 or by email ID electionofficer@imare.in or administration@imare.in so as to receive by 16th AUG, 2013, 1700 hrs. Arrangement for seating and for lunch will be made only for those who have confirmed their desire to witness the counting.

For the members, who wish to witness this counting, prior intimation as above is

a

MUST. However, the electoral candidates or their authorized representatives and the Head office/Branch/ Chapter office- bearers are free to witness the counting, but they are requested to give prior information to administration so that seating/ lunch can be arranged.

The results of the elections will be announced at the 30th Annual General Meeting of our Institute.

DR.B.K.SAXENA

V.P. DATAR

President

Election officer

 
NOTIcE Dear Members, The Flag Hoisting Ceremony will be conducted at 9.30 AM on 15
NOTIcE
Dear Members,
The Flag Hoisting Ceremony will
be conducted at 9.30 AM on 15 th
August 2013 (Independence Day)
at IMEI House, Nerul.
The flag will be hoisted by the
president – Dr. B. K. Saxena.
You are cordially invited with your
family to grace the occasion.
Please Inform in advance for
making necessary arrangements.
With Warm Regards,
Rajeev Nayyer
Hon. Gen. Secretary
With Warm Regards, Rajeev Nayyer Hon. Gen. Secretary M arine E ngineers R eview (I ndia

Branch News

Kolkata Branch AGM 2013

T he Annual General Meeting of the Institute’s Kolkata Branch for the financial year ending 31st March, 2013 was held on 21st June, 2013 at Maharaja Banquets, Kolkata.

In his opening speech, the Chairman of Kolkata Branch, Mr Subimal Chakrabarti, lamented the fact that the drive to induce unpaid members to take up life membership of the institute had not borne much fruit, though there was success in the recruitment of new members.

Minutes of the previous AGM held on 23rd June, 2012 were confirmed. The confirmation was proposed by Mr A.C.Guha and seconded by Mr Kalyan Bhattacharya.

The Branch Activity Report for the year 2012-13 was presented in PowerPoint form by Hon.Secretary Mr Abhijit Banerjee.

As no one from Patna Chapter could be present for the meeting, the Branch Activity Report of that chapter was read out by Mr Abhijit Banerjee, Hon.Secretary of Kolkata Branch.

Balance Sheet and Audited Accounts of the branch for the year 2012-13 were presented by Hon.Treasurer Mr P.K.Bhattacharya. The accounts were accepted without any amendment. The acceptance was proposed by Mr Supriyo Bhattacharya and seconded by Mr Gautam Sen.

The auditors were reappointed for the financial year 2013- 14. The reappointment was proposed by Mr P.B.Ray and seconded by Mr Supriyo Bhattacharya.

Under ‘Any Other Matter’, Mr A.C.Guha appealed for

increased participation by members in the Institute’s activities and affairs. He also appealed to members to donate good books to the Institute’s library, and asked younger members particularly to make more use of the library.

Mr S.K.Mukherjee suggested that the Annual Dinner be spaced far apart from the Cricket Match, and slotted well before it in the calendar, so that it is held in cool weather. Mr P.K.Majumder advocated screening of a particular anti- piracy film by the Institute in Kolkata. Mr Arunodoy Mittra suggested that the film be screened at MERI auditorium, to benefit young seafarers. Mr B.K.Biswas wondered if we could hold the Annual Dinner at a venue with larger space. He also expressed his inability to locate the Institute premises in Kolkata, even after so many years. Mr Alok Kumar Datta had an issue with not getting to know about the Institute’s programmes by e-mail. The Hon.Secretary indicated that all these matters will be looked into by the committee in all seriousness. Vice Chairman Mr S.K.Daw proposed a formal vote of thanks.

The meeting concluded with a sponsored dinner.

of thanks. The meeting concluded with a sponsored dinner. Chairman Mr Subimal Chakrabarti addressing the members

Chairman Mr Subimal Chakrabarti addressing the members

Chairman Mr Subimal Chakrabarti addressing the members Members at the Kolkata AGM Talk on MLc 2006

Members at the Kolkata AGM

Talk on MLc 2006 at Karnataka

T he Institute of Marine Engineers (India) Karnataka chapter organized a talk on "MLC 2006: the fourth pillar

of shipping. Capt. John Prasad Menezes was the resource person. In his 45 min talk he took the audience 100yrs back to the sinking of Titanic and the onset of SOLAS and other regulations to follow, the latest being MLC 2006. He also delved on the salient features of the legislation and their impact on the crew on board. It was a joint meeting with the CMMI Mangalore Chapter. The meeting was followed by fellowship,

which bought the members closer.

was followed by fellowship, which bought the members closer. 10 M arine E ngineers R eview
was followed by fellowship, which bought the members closer. 10 M arine E ngineers R eview

10 Marine Engineers R eview (I ndia ) August 2013

www.imare.in

Branch News

Lukoil Presentation In Kolkata

L UKOIL Marine Lubricants Ltd, a division of LUKOIL, an international leader in the oil

industry, made a technical presentation, under the aegis of The Institute of Marine Engineers (India) Kolkata Branch, on the evening of 17th July 2013, at Hotel Hindusthan International, Kolkata, on the topic ‘Recent Developments in Cylinder Oils’.

The speakers were Mrs June Manoharan, LUKOIL Marine Lubricants Ltd’s Regional Director for Middle East, Asia and Africa, who is based in Dubai, and Mr Sanjiv Wazir, Technical Advisor to LUKOIL Marine Lubricants. Mr Wazir is a Member of the Institute of Marine Engineers (India), and an expert in the field of tribology and lubrication. Mr Abhijit Banerjee, Hon. Secretary of Kolkata Branch, introduced the speakers and the subject.

Mrs Manoharan spoke about LUKOIL, the company, since the brand name is relatively unknown in these parts.

Mr Wazir spoke about the special requirements of cylinder lubrication in new two-stroke engines and older engines running nowadays under prolonged slow steaming conditions. He further explained that several lube oil manufacturers are developing new grades of cylinder oil to meet the challenges posed, with LUKOIL, having already introduced a unique 100 BN grade oil for the purpose.

The presentations were captivating and well received by the members, representatives of industry, end users and invitees, who turned up in good numbers. There was much interaction in the question and answer session, and even afterwards, informally, during the cocktails and dinner, which were arranged courtesy of LUKOIL. All in all, it was a very pleasant and

enlightening evening.

All in all, it was a very pleasant and enlightening evening. Mr Wazir making presentation Mrs
All in all, it was a very pleasant and enlightening evening. Mr Wazir making presentation Mrs

Mr Wazir making presentation

and enlightening evening. Mr Wazir making presentation Mrs Manoharan making presentation Delegates and members at

Mrs Manoharan making presentation

Wazir making presentation Mrs Manoharan making presentation Delegates and members at the meet IME(I) Delhi Branch

Delegates and members at the meet

IME(I) Delhi Branch AGM & Technical Seminar

AGM of the Delhi Branch will be held on 21st August 2013 from 5 PM to 6 PM at Forte Grand, chanakya Lane, Akbar Bhawan Annexe, chanakya Puri, New Delhi-110021.

The AGM will be followed by a Technical Seminar presented by “Roto Pumps Limited." This will be followed by Dinner at the same Venue.

All members are invited (Entry Free), those desirous of attending may please contact Ms. Asha on (O)011-41660109, 011-41660110, (M)9650426134 at the earliest as the seats are limited.

Branch News

Goa Branch AGM

T he Annual General Body Meeting of the Goa Branch of the

Institute of Marine Engineers (India) was held on 20th of July

2013 at 1900 hrs. at the Hotel La-Paz Gardens, Vasco-da-gama.

The Goa Branch Chairman Shri V.M.Gaitonde welcomed the members and requested everyone to rise for 1 minute silence for the souls of our 2 young members who we lost on 19th of March 2013. The 3rd engineers Mr. Bento D’Costa and Mr. Reagan Fernandes were travelling back to Mumbai from Goa for the Class 2 preparatory course which was being conducted in IME Nerul. He informed the members that the IMEI had given each of their families an amount of Rs 5 lakhs from the Benevolence fund. He said that during the last AGM the revision of the Articles of Association, Increase the life membership fees to Rs 4600/, setting up of a separate examination cell at IMEI for NCV examination, grant of additional FSI has been given for IMEI, grant for a total amount of 2 lakhs for 8 students from approved training institutes had been taken up. He also informed the members of the proposal from IMarEST to give IMEI members access to the virtual library consisting of digital archive, discovery service, e-book collection etc. He mentioned that the formation of FMPO is under consideration. A lot of discussion was on the quality of marine engineers of today had taken place. He thanked the members for the keen interest shown in attending the technical meetings and the committee members for their support during his tenure as Chairman

Shri Dipak B Shah, Hon. Secretary, presented the activity report. He reported that there were 9 technical meetings in the last year. The examination for the cadets of Institute of Maritime Studies was carried out by the Goa Branch members. Approval of the audited accounts for the year 2012-2013 was proposed by Shri Asthana and seconded by Shri Samant .The accounts for the year 2013-2014 were passed and auditor Shri S. D. Mishra was proposed to be continued and his remuneration to be increased to Rs 2000/-. This was proposed by Shri Samant and seconded by Shri Joshi. The Membership status shows that all the unpaid members have been deleted from the Goa branch and our membership status has only 621 paid life members compared to 544 of last year. All members in the future will be life members. Mentoring has been progressing very well for the Cadets of Institute of Maritime Studies. Our Goa branch mentors have been regularly interacting with the cadets and guiding them very efficiently. The proposed activities were to have technical meetings every month with speakers from Goa and outside in the marine engineering filed.

from Goa and outside in the marine engineering filed. Members at the AGM 12 M arine

Members at the AGM

12 Marine Engineers R eview (I ndia ) August 2013

12 M arine E ngineers R eview (I ndia ) August 2013 Goa Branch Chairman Shri

Goa Branch Chairman Shri Gaitonde welcoming the members

A suggestion was made by members that the Goa branch should

recommend to the Head office to take up with DGS that all students

of Marine engineering training institutes approved and audited by

DGS should be exempted from the Class IV part A examination irrespective of their entry qualifications. There was a lot of discussion on this matter and it was felt that the matter should be taken up with the head office.

Shri Dipak B Shah introduced the incoming Chairman Shri Dilip Mehrotra, Vice- Chairman Shri Ajay A. Tambwekar, Hon.Secretary Shri Dipak B Shah, Treasurer Shri Mahesh Mehndiratta, G.C. Members Shri B.S.Mathur and Shri V.M.Gaitonde, Committee members Shri Sangmeshwaran.C.S, Shri M.C. Asthana and Shri Alwyn D’Souza. Shri Mehrotra detailed his plans for the next Goa Branch. He said we should have Members Directory, more involvement of members in the activities of the Institute, new membership drive, a National Seminar, to encourage members for submission of technical papers from sailing members for the monthly MER, and to have a meeting of members before and after GC. He felt the need to have Seminars and group discussion on IMO matters and new regulations for members appearing for MEO exams, to start with atleast once in two months, To entertain all requests from parents, students & schools on career guidance in Marine Engineering. He mentioned that a plan can be drawn of the List of Technical topics to be covered during the year and to continue with the Mentorship programme. He said that a Strategy framework document – in draft stage which deals with various ongoing activities is being finalized.

Shri B.S.Mathur who has been vigorously following the construction of the IMEI House at Goa said that the fittings and furniture is being finalized. The IMEI house should be completed

in September 2013.

Shri Dipak B Shah thanked all the speakers of the technical presentations during the year and also the members who had assisted in arranging the speakers. He thanked the Chairman Shri Gaitonde for his whole hearted support in the last 2 years and all the committee members. He thanked the members for being present in the AGM. He thanked the Hotel La-paz Gardens for their hospitality.

The AGM was followed by a contributory family dinner which was

well attended.

The AGM was followed by a contributory family dinner which was well attended. w w w

www.imare.in

Obituary

Dr. c.P. Srivastava

Obituary Dr. c.P. Srivastava ~ 1920 – 2013~ D r. Chandrika Prasad Srivastava, KCMG, Secretary-General Emeritus

~ 1920 – 2013~

Obituary Dr. c.P. Srivastava ~ 1920 – 2013~ D r. Chandrika Prasad Srivastava, KCMG, Secretary-General Emeritus

D r. Chandrika Prasad Srivastava, KCMG, Secretary-General Emeritus of the International Maritme Organization (IMO),

and Fellow Member of IME(I) passed away on 22nd July 2013

in Italy at the age of 93.

Dr C.P. Srivastava was born on 08 July, 1920 and was educated in Lucknow, India. He started his career as a civil servant in India, serving as the district administrator in Meerut and Lucknow. From 1964-1966 he worked as Joint Secretary in the office of Prime Minister of India Sri. Lal Bahadur Shastri.

Early in his career, he found his forte in the field of seafarers training and welfare. During 1947 to 1948, he was the prime mover in the establishment of a network of new maritime

training institutions, which have since produced world class maritime personnel, greatly facilitating the growth of Indian shipping in the years following Independence.

After a stint at the Directorate General of Shipping, he was appointed as the Founder Chief Executive of the Shipping Corporation of India, a Government of India enterprise. He built it up to become the largest shipping company of India and one of the biggest and most successful shipping companies of the world, with a diversified fleet of cargo liners, tankers, bulk carriers and passenger ships.

In 1974 he was elected to serve as the Secretary-General of the International Maritime Organization (IMO), and was re-elected unanimously for three further successive four-year terms, serving until his retirement in 1989. As Secretary-General of IMO, Dr. C.P. Srivastava recognized the crucial importance of the human element in ensuring safety and efficiency in international shipping. During this time he played a pioneering role in the establishment of the International Maritime Academy in Italy, and the International Maritime Law Institute in Malta. He also established the Sweden-based World Maritime University in 1983 to address a pressing need for maritime professionals in the developing world. He was also the first Chancellor of WMU

which has become IMO’s centre of excellence for postgraduate maritime education.

During Dr. Srivastava’s tenure as Secretary-General, IMO increased its membership considerably. Dr. Srivastava was well known for his relentless efforts to make IMO known to the developing world and for encouraging developing countries to join the “rich men’s club”, as IMO was often referred to at the time. This shaped the structure of the Organization’s membership to its present status, whereby two-thirds of the 170-strong

membership (and three Associate Members) is represented by developing countries.

During his tenure, a comprehensive, pragmatic and co- ordinated programme of technical co-operation was conceived and developed and effective steps were taken to promote its continuing implementation.

He served as Chairman of Indian Register of Shipping (1990 – 1994) during which period IRS was admitted as Associate Member of International Association of Classification Societies.

Dr. CP Srivastava has lead an incredible life. His record of achievement stands alone, and provides a clear message about his accomplishments. List of Honours and Awards, National and International is very long. Few of them are listed below:

He received the Padma Bhusan in 1972 in recognition of his contributions to establishing one of the most successful public sector undertakings in India.

In 1990, in recognition of his service and contribution to world shipping, Dr. C. P. Srivastava was conferred, by Queen Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom, the title of Honorary Knight Commander of the Most Distinguished Order of Saint Michael and Saint George (KCMG).

In 1991, he received the International Maritime prize from IMO for his contribution to the Organization's work and objectives.

In 2005 he was awarded the 2004 Lal bahadur Shastri National Award for Excellence in Public Administration and Management Sciences by the then President of India, A. P. J. Abdul Kalam.

In 2009, he was awarded the Padma Vibhushan, India’s second highest civilian award, by the President of India.

Dr. Srivastava will be remembered for his visionary and pioneering role in development of the world shipping and exceptionally meritorious services to the International Maritime Organization with total commitment to its ideals and objectives.

Dr. C.P. Srivastava was married to Nirmala Srivastava, the founder of Sahaja Yoga, a unique method of meditation, based on an experience called self-realization. Dr.C. P. Srivastava has stated that his life has been greatly influenced by his wife and he has been motivated by her vision of one Almighty God and one human family. This vision motivated him in all aspects of his life.

He is survived by two daughters, Kalpana Srivastava and

Sadhana Varma.

Obituary

Mr. B.L. Mehta

Obituary Mr. B.L. Mehta ~ 1935 – 2013~ Believe that life is worth living and your

~ 1935 – 2013~ Believe that life is worth living and your belief will help create the fact.

is worth living and your belief will help create the fact. M r. Brij Lal Mehta

M r. Brij Lal Mehta a fellow member and founder Office Bearer of IME(I) and a well known figure in the Indian

Shipping Industry passed away on 17th July, 2013 in Mumbai.

Mr. B.L. Mehta was born on 4th June 1935 in Rauwall, District Gurdaspur, in the state of Punjab. He was a visionary and had a thought out plan for not only his life, but also for uplifting the entire family. He was a man with grit and determination and vision and believed that if you have courage and determination you can make all your dreams come true.

He started off his professional journey in 1952, when he joined Naval Dockyard as an apprentice. On completion of apprenticeship in 1957 he joined Mugul Line as 5th Engineer. In 1962 he switched over to Jayanti Shipping as 2nd Engineer and rose to the rank of Chief Engineer in 1964. For excellence in Engineering knowledge, he was awarded with Gold Medal,

for his 1st Class Examination, by the Mercantile Marine department Government of India, Mumbai.

In 1965 he stepped ashore and joined Jayanti Shipping Company as an Engineer Superintendent. In 1969 he joined Shipping Corporation of India, and rose to the position of Executive Director of the Public Sector Company. At that time he was the youngest Director of Public sector shipping company.

In 1981 he joined Century Shipping, under Aditya Birla Group, as Chief Executive and was responsible for building the company and turning it into a profit making shipping company in a short span of time.

In 1991 he moved to Reliance Industries Ltd. as President, Shipping Division. He was responsible for setting up and operating Ethylene Supply chain, for the Hazira Petrochemical Complex, which was done by uniquely designed shallow draft Liquefied Ethylene Carriers discharging at dedicated terminal. This Ship to Ship Ethylene Transfer System was undertaken for the first time in Asia Pacific region.

Mr. Mehta has represented on various Technical and Professional shipping bodies like,

Chairman of Indian Technical Committee of Lloyd’s Register of Shipping,

Member of American Bureau of Shipping and

President Indian National Ship owners’ Association (INSA) for two year term.

In 1995 he joined Varun Shipping Company Ltd. as an Executive President, and built the company fleet to 13 ships including LPG carriers, amounting to 50% of Indian LPG fleet.

His papers, which even today, are a bench mark for Indian LNG policy and emanates from well-researched material, his administrative and technical knowledge, and long experience.

In 2002, he chose to retire and decided to spend time at Hrishikesh. He took up his passion, Yoga and meditation.

In 2003, INSA had nominated Mr. B. L. Mehta for the Varuna Award .

During his entire professional journey he contributed immensely to the shipping industry.

No matter how many long hours of work he had, he also took care to meet all the needs of his family. He was married at an early age of 23 to Sudarshan. She has been a strong pillar of support and stood beside him through thick and thin. He has wonderful two sons Sanjeev and Sanjay who are renowned doctors today. He was extremely fond of his five grandchildren for whom he will always remain as a role model.

Today when his journey has come to an end we remember him not with grief but with happiness, not with a sigh of sorrow but a smile of joy, for all the lives he has touched upon in his life.

A true Guru, a friend, a philosopher, a poet, a mentor, a devoted son, a visionary, an idealistic, a man of substance.

Shri B.L. Mehta will always be remembered as a man of steel

with a golden heart.

14 Marine Engineers R eview (I ndia ) August 2013

www.imare.in

News

Honour for Uday Purohit Managing Director, Neptunus Group of companies

H e is the founder Director Neptunus Power Plant Services Pvt. Ltd which he started in 1996 with a vision to ‘Delight’

customers. He is an expert in Root Cause Analysis of Diesel and Gas engine failures. Mr. Purohit has set up 38 gas engine based power plants for Guascor Gas Engines between 2006 and 2010. He is working closely with the engineering team of Niigata Power Systems of Japan to tropicalize their gas engines for the Indian market. He has created and delivered for over a decade training modules for V Ships’ senior seafarers. He has trained over 2000 Engineers and Mates between 1999 and 2010. His special skills are Organization building using “Theory of Constraint”, customer tailored engineering solutions, creating and implementing Quality Management Systems, analyzing engine failures and designing of Captive Power Plants.

He has had a successful career at sea as a Marine Engineer with three leading Shipping Companies, Tradax Gestion, Switzerland, Mobil Oil, UK and Dole Fresh Fruits, USA (1981-1994). He is a Member of our Institute

He was recently crowned ‘The Completely Boss’ in the Microsoft sponsored challenge rounds where 2700 SMEs participated. The award recognizes his leadership skills and vision.

Underpinning the growth of SMBs in India, Microsoft started an initiative named Completely Boss Challenge. Through this

an initiative named Completely Boss Challenge. Through this challenge, Microsoft aimed to reward and celebrate

challenge, Microsoft aimed to reward and celebrate outstanding business leaders from the thriving mid-market sector.

It is a unique opportunity for leaders, CEOs and directors of midsize businesses to highlight their achievements. The winners get a chance to have Microsoft (technology), LinkedIn (talent), Moneycontrol.com (media), WebChutney (marketing), DOOR (business consulting) and CRISIL SME Ratings (knowledge) develop robust 5-year business growth plans for their companies.

Marine Engineers Review (I) congratulates Mr Uday Purohit for

this outstanding achievement.

Mr Uday Purohit for this outstanding achievement. Smart Sulphur Switching Device D anish-based Insatech has

Smart Sulphur Switching Device

D anish-based Insatech has developed the Smart Sulphur Switch S3 system (S3), which is claimed to minimise a shipping

companies’ additional costs as a result of the requirements of MARPOL Annex VI.

The price of the S3 is less than 5% of the price for a scrubber, the company said.

The system has the ability to blend and adjust two fuels to the desired sulphur content. This enables monitoring and control of sulphur emissions. It logs and reports net fuel sulphur content, density and the ship's position and speed.

By installing the S3 system, shipping companies will meet MARPOL’s requirements for observance, as well as documentation, of sulphur emissions, Insatech said. Additional costs are minimized, since there is only a need for two types of fuel aboard.

Irrespective of the ship’s destination, it is only necessary to carry a marine gas oil (MGO) and a heavy fuel oil (HFO). Outside ECAs,

the cheapest fuel can be burnt and when entering an ECA, the MGO and HFO blend can be adjusted in order to meet the allowed sulphur emission in the area.

The system is claimed to be able to provide shipping companies with significant savings by simplifying logistics regarding fuel handling, minimising the products needed aboard, reducing the number of bunker operations and limiting consumption of the more expensive MGO.

In addition, use of chemicals is avoided and construction costs and downtime during installation are minimised. The price for the S3 is less than 5% of the price of a gas scrubber, S3 is easy to retrofit and the ship does not have to be drydocked in order to install the system, as it can be easily mounted while the ship is at sea. Maintenance is limited to one yearly calibration.

Currently, Insatech is awaiting the results of an international patent

application for the system.

of an international patent application for the system. M arine E ngineers R eview (I ndia

News

carnival Decides on Automatic Fuel Management System

C arnival Corporation contracts with JOWA Technology & JOWA WFE for equipment supply, installation & product training throughout its cruise fleet.

Carnival representatives believe that the automated fuel switching system by JOWA Technology can save fuel by optimising fuel changeover time when transiting in or out

of

emission control areas, and that the system has proven to

be

reliable, consistently accurate, and to reduce the potential

for crew error.

This agreement, says Carnival, follows a period of extensive testing on board the Princess Cruises’ cruise ship Grand Princess. The tested Diesel Switch DS MKII includes

a second display in the ECR, a compatibility test kit,

homogenizer and a GPS connection with date/time stamp. The JOWA Water-in Fuel Emulsion unit was also tested. All testing was conducted in co-operation between specialists from Carnival and JOWA Technology engineers, with independent monitoring by Lloyd’s Register.

Carnival selected JOWA Technology because of their experience and unique position in the market with the only proven, fully automated fuel changeover system. The Diesel Switch DS MKII is the only unit in the market that carries Class Society Type Approval, and has been acknowledged by the United States Coast Guard as capable of improving the safety of fuel changeover operations. JOWA also has an extensive reference list of successful installations outside the cruise industry.

of successful installations outside the cruise industry. The DS MKII also has the built in capability

The DS MKII also has the built in capability to blend compatible heavy and distillate fuels, using in-line fuel blending to safely mix two compatible fuels to obtain a final product with constant, pre-set sulphur content in accordance with local regulations. To ensure the blending compatibility of two fuels, JOWA supplies a simple, portable testing kit for use by ship’s personnel.

Further, the DS MKII has full control over the temperature gradient during fuel change over, minimizing risk of thermal shock, gassing, and the potential risk for loss of power.

The JOWA system also offers an electronic data storage feature which includes start, stop, sulphur content of HFO,

MDO and Blend Fuel, longitude, latitude, date and time.

HFO, MDO and Blend Fuel, longitude, latitude, date and time. Maritime Events For Your Diary Aug.

Maritime Events For Your Diary

Aug. 10, 2013

Mumbai, India. AGM IMEI Mumbai Branch, Navi Mumbai and Gujarat Chapters. +91 22851195/22834035

Aug. 15, 2013

Mumbai, India. Flag Hoisting ceremony at IMEI House Nerul, +91 27701664

Aug. 21, 2013

Delhi, India.AGM IMEI Delhi Branch, contact Ms.Asha on (O) 011-41660109, 011-41660110, (M)9650426134

Sep. 05-07, 2013

Jakarta, Indonesia.Indonesia Maritime Expo.www.maritimexpo.co.id

Oct. 08-10, 2013

Mumbai, India. INMEX India 2013. www.Inmex_India_2013

Oct. 22-25, 2013

Busan, South Korea. International Shipbuilding and Marine Exhibition. www.reedexpo.com/en Events/2671/KORMARINE

Dec. 04-05, 2013

Warnemünde, Germany, 2nd Arctic Shipping and Offshore Technology Forum. http://imarest.org/arctic

Dec. 11-13, 2014

Mumbai, India.INMARCO-INAvation International Maritime Technology Conference & Exhibition. +91 22851195/22834035

16 Marine Engineers R eview (I ndia ) August 2013

www.imare.in

News

classNK chairman and President Noboru Ueda Honored at Seatrade Asia Awards

H ong Kong - ClassNK Chairman and President Noboru Ueda was honored with the Seatrade Lifetime

Achievement Award at the Seatrade Asia Awards on 21 June 2013 in recognition of his outstanding contribution to the development of the maritime sector in Asia. Held annually by London-based maritime media company Seatrade Communications, the Seatrade Asia Awards recognizes excellence in such fields as innovation, safety, and education within the Asian maritime industry. The awards ceremony was held in the JW Marriott Hotel, Hong Kong with the attendance of almost 400 people from all over the maritime industry.

Speaking on the occasion, Mr. Ueda said: “As chairman and president of ClassNK, it has been my mission to ensure that our classification society would make a positive and lasting impact on the maritime industry. I am deeply honored to receive this award, a symbol that we have achieved some small part of this goal”.

ClassNK was also awarded with the “Classification Society Award” and the “Technical Innovation Award” by a distinguished panel of judges. This marks the third consecutive year for ClassNK to be awarded the Classification

year for ClassNK to be awarded the Classification Noboru Ueda (middle) receiving the Seatrade Lifetime

Noboru Ueda (middle) receiving the Seatrade Lifetime Achievement Award

Society Award. These selections were based on ClassNK’s commitment to innovation and activities in the greater Asian maritime industry and its dedication to contributing to the intellectual development of the industry over the past year. The awards were received by Mr. Ueda on behalf of

ClassNK.

The awards were received by Mr. Ueda on behalf of ClassNK. classNK Releases Progressive Speed Trial

classNK Releases Progressive Speed Trial Analysis Software PrimeShip-GREEN/PSTA

T okyo – Leading classification society ClassNK (Chairman and President: Noboru Ueda) has announced the development

of the software, PrimeShip-GREEN/PSTA (Progressive Speed Trial Analysis), to help shipyards comply with the Amendment to MARPOL Annex VI making calculation of a vessel’s EEDI (Energy Efficiency Design Index) mandatory. The software analyzes the results from speed trials and calculates a ship’s speed

in calm sea conditions.

The Amendment to MARPOL Annex VI came into force from January 2013, enforcing mandatory EEDI calculation and EEDI regulation values for vessels contracted from 1 January 2013 onwards. When calculating EEDI, external factors such as the wind, waves, tides, shallow waters, and displacement during speed trials can be corrected for to allow for higher accuracy when determining

a ship’s speed in calm sea conditions. ClassNK developed this software to provide a straightforward method for compensating for external factors in progressive speed trial analysis based on ISO Standard 15016:2002, recognized in the IMO EEDI Guidelines “2012 GUIDELINES ON SURVEY AND CERTIFICATION OF THE ENERGY EFFICIENCY DESIGN INDEX (EEDI)”.

ClassNK is committed to supporting the maritime industry in complying with new international conventions, and is constantly developing various support tools among others as part of this commitment.

PrimeShip-GREEN/PSTA is provided to shipyards free of charge. To apply, please complete the application form available from the

link below and return to the ClassNK EEDI Division.

from the link below and return to the ClassNK EEDI Division. M arine E ngineers R

News

cSA to Test Ballast Water Treatment Systems

T he Canadian Shipowners Association (CSA) is working with the Great Ships Initiative (GSI), to perform efficacy tests of

ballast water filtration systems in the unique, cold, fresh waters of the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Waterway.

The CSA, run by President Robert Lewis-Manning, represents the interests of short sea ship owners, whose vessels operate trade routes within a single continent only.

The Great Ships Initiative (GSI), is a project of the Northeast- Midwest Institute (NEMWI), that since its establishment in 2006 has had as its main objective the eradication of ship-facilitated or ship-caused invasive species in the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Seaway System, as well as globally.

It does so by providing performance/verification testing services to developers of ballast water management systems (BWMS) across the product developing phase, including bench, land- based and shipboard.

With the recent ratification of the Ballast Water Convention by Germany, the legislation is near coming into force which highlights more than ever the urgency behind the newly announced partnership: To date no technology has been type- approved for operation in the GLSLW waters, where Canadian vessels operate.

“Many of these international initiatives were developed with the best of intentions, but when applied to domestic short sea shipping, they have unintended consequences that could limit the industry's attempts to innovate and renew with new vessels. The marine industry in Canada and the United States has never faced a single regulatory and environmental challenge as complex as that associated with the regulation of ballast water discharges,” writes Robert Lewis-Manning, President of the Canadian Shipowners Association, in his Letter from the President.

“It is unlikely that Canadian government officials, or industry for that matter, ever considered the impact to short sea shipping when the Ballast Water Convention was conceived over a decade ago, nor even when Canada ratified the Convention in 2010. The marine industry in Canada and the United States remains poised to develop a made-in-the-Great-Lakes solution to ballast water and other regulations, but it will require leadership and collaboration between industry, government at all levels and across boarders, and the scientific community in order to develop sustainable outcomes,” He went on to explain in the letter.

Recent investments of over $700 million in 14 new vessels have positioned the short sea Canadian industry for growth, whilst this new partnership marks a key step forward towards the types of collaborations that Lewis-Manning describes as being so essential to the industry's survival.

He explained in the recent press release detailing the partnership:

“Our membership has a track record of leading the use of

18 Marine Engineers R eview (I ndia ) August 2013

of 18 M arine E ngineers R eview (I ndia ) August 2013 innovative technologies and

innovative technologies and best management practices to improve performance, safety and to protect the environment.”

“The partnership of our membership with GSI is important because it builds on our industry’s leadership and demonstrates the commitment of the members of the Canadian Shipowners Association to find solutions that are practical, can work in our unique operating environment and will achieve results in a cost effective manner,” He continued.

Since 2006, a bi-national (Canada - U.S) requirement between Canada and the United States, in which a mid-ocean ballast water exchange has been enforced, has meant that no new organisms have been detected in the GLSLW from beyond Canadian

territorial waters.

new organisms have been detected in the GLSLW from beyond Canadian territorial waters. w w w

www.imare.in

News

Draft Ec Legislation For Monitoring, Reporting and Verification of GHG Emissions

European commission Proposed Strategy

The EC proposed strategy is to develop a three phase approach consisting of: initial development for MRV reporting; future development of GHG reduction targets for shipping; and, in the medium to long term, the possible application of additional provisions such as a Market Based Measure (MBM).

The EC proposes that a European system could either be used as the basis for a global system to be adopted by IMO, or in the event of agreement being reached at IMO; the European proposals could be modified to align with any future IMO system.

Key features of Ec Legislative Proposals

The following key features are included in the EC proposals:

1. From 1 January 2018, CO2 emissions and fuel efficiency for ships of greater than 5000GT will be monitored for:

I.

Voyages between ports within the EU;

II.

Voyages into Europe from the last non-EU port to the first EU port of call;

III. Voyages from an EU port to the next non-EU port of call; and IV. Emissions from ships within EU ports will also be subject to MRV

2.

In addition to monitoring of the amount and type of fuel consumed, it is proposed that information will also be required on: distance travelled; cargo and/or passengers carried; and time spent at sea. The proposed use and definitions of these additional parameters are not clear. It is suggested that they could be adjusted at a later stage following consideration;

3.

Data is to be independently verified and reported to both the European Commission and the ship's Flag State. A future requirement (from 2019) for the carriage of a “Document of Compliance” is also proposed; and

4.

Information will be published identifying individual ships and their owners with annual averages for a range of parameters including: fuel consumption & CO2 emissions; distance

travelled; cargo carried; time at sea etc.

distance travelled; cargo carried; time at sea etc. cScL Equips More of its Fleet with EcO-Assistant

cScL Equips More of its Fleet with EcO-Assistant

S hanghai/Hamburg, 28 June 2013 - To enhance the operational efficiency of its fleet, China Shipping Container Lines Co.,

Ltd. (CSCL) has rolled out ECO-Assistant onto its entire fleet of

eight 14,000TEU container vessels, following a successful test of the software on one of these vessels. Furthermore, an extra agreement was signed to expand the deployment of ECO-Assistant to another eight 9,600TEU container vessels of CSCL's fleet.

ECO-Assistant is advanced trim optimisation software developed by FutureShip, the maritime consultancy unit of classification society Germanischer Lloyd (GL). Once installed onboard, it can produce instant fuel savings and a reduction of the ship's CO2 emissions.

The sea trial report provided by FutureShip demonstrated that fuel savings of 10% have been achieved in one sailing of the 14,000TEU container vessel using the tool. A further verification test conducted by CSCL resulted in a reduction of fuel consumption of up to 8.2%.

ECO-Assistant has displayed in the real operation its instant effect in saving fuel and cutting down on emissions. While used as a hands-on tool for lowering the operational cost of a fleet, it also has

the potential to be instrumental in reducing the fuel consumption and environmental footprint of the whole shipping industry.

Trim is one of the central drivers of energy efficiency in ship operation. The ECO-Assistant delivers an optimum trim angle for a specific ship with an input of a few simple operational parameters, such as current speed, displacement and water depth. As a result, fuel savings and reduction of CO2 emissions can be realised instantly. The initial investment in implementing the system can usually be paid back in the short term.

"As well as its instant effect, this software is easy to install, as there is no need to modify the vessels. The software itself is also very user friendly, so the training required is minimally time intensive," said Vincent Li, Vice President of FutureShip China. "The system can also be deployed in all types of vessels, including container vessels, multi-purpose vessels and bulk carriers."

Since its launch in 2009, there have been more than 300 installations of the tool onboard and onshore across the globe. In Asia, it is being employed by many large operators including Masterbulk. In 2012, ECO-Assistant won the Environment Award at the Lloyd's List

Asia Awards.

the Environment Award at the Lloyd's List Asia Awards. M arine E ngineers R eview (I

News

Another LNG Powered Vessel Takes To the Waves

T his past month saw the first of Fjord Line's two new cruise ferries, which will be LNG powered, christened at Bergen

Group Fosen’s Rissa shipyard. On 8th July 2013, Fjord Line then accepted delivery for the first of the pair, the MS Stavangerfjord.

Even before delivery, the vessel had generated high expectations:

its efficiency credientials had already been recognised by the Secretary-General of the International Maritime Organization (IMO), Koji Sekimizu with an award for energy efficiency at NorShipping.

The vessel's four gas engines, each with twelve cylinders and delivering 5,400 kW (7,300 hp), were delivered by Rolls Royce. The cruise ferries will be the first in the world to run exclusively on LNG, with substantially reduced emissions as a result.

Nitrogen oxides (NOx) emissions will be reduced by a huge 92%, whilst sulphur emissions will be eradicated. PM will also show a significant drop of 98%. The technology will also offer a net drop of GHG C02 of 22%.

“Air pollution while docked in port will also be minimal because the diesel auxiliary engines have been equipped with powerful catalytic converters. That means the cruise ferries will not add to the winter smog problems that sometimes hit Bergen and other cities,” said Fjord Line's CEO Ingvald Fardal.

“There are many who deserve a great vote of thanks for carrying out this amazing feat: Our owners who made these investments possible; our financial partners; our government that invested through the NOx Fund in environmentally sound technologies. We also thank everyone who helped with the design and planning of everything from technically important details to artistic decorations, not to mention the subcontractors and everyone at Bergen Group

Fosen. They have all proven that high quality shipbuilding and outfitting is still alive and well in our country,” said Fardal.

The vessel was named by Janne Johnsen, mayor of Rogaland county. “Our finest dreams have come true,” said Fardal at the ceremony.

500 permanent and contract staff at the Bergen Group Fosen shipyard were involved in the ship building process of the MS Stavangerfjord. Next to join the fleet will be the sister ship, MS Bergensfjord.

The vessel has originally been due for delivery in May, but was pushed back a full month to the end of June. “We have booked the most technically advanced equipment available, and just have to take into account that the yard needs more time to get this in place and tested,” said Fardal at the time that the news broke.

The financial ramifications will be explained in Fjord Line's quarterly financial report.

At the naming ceremony, the Shipyard DirectorAnders Straumsheim was upfront about the difficulties, ended on a positive note: “So that makes it even more gratifying to be able to deliver this elegant ship with new designs and environmentally-friendly LNG engines that will set the standard for similar projects to come.”

On its maiden voyage, the ship will call on Stavanger and Bergen, before returning to Hirtshals on July 16. It will make its first crossing to its new terminal in Langesund, Norway the same day.

MS Stavangerfjord is 170 meters long and can accommodate 1,500 passengers in its summer configuration. The cargo decks can carry up to 600 motor vehicles. The vessel will serve the lines Bergen-

Stavanger-Hirtshals and Hirtshals-Langesund.

lines Bergen- Stavanger-Hirtshals and Hirtshals-Langesund. The Institute Of Marine Enginers (India) IMEI HOUSE, Plot

The Institute Of Marine Enginers (India)

IMEI HOUSE, Plot No. 94, Sector – 19, Nerul, Navi Mumbai. Tel: 2770 1664, 27706749 Telefax: 27711663 (Direct), email: training@imare.in • Website: www.imare.in

REGISTRATION OPEN FOR Following DGS APPROVED COURSES

• Refresher & Upgradation Course for Engineer Officers commencing on 19th August 2013

• MEO CL. IV (NCV) 4 months Course Commencing on 15th September 2013

• MEO CL. II (FG) – 4 months Prep. Course commencing on 3rd DEC. 2013/ 2nd Jan.2014

• MEO CL. III(NCV_CEO) & (NCV_SEO) preparatory course commencing on 1st August 2013

Note :

Payment can be done online through our website: www.imare.in and also through the ICICI Bank on A/C No.: 015101031872 in the name of “Institute of Marine Engineers (India)” only after confirming the availability of seats.

For enquiries contact on 022-27711663 between 1400 – 1700hrs

Features: Experienced Faculty, Air Conditioned Class Rooms, Well-Stocked Library, Individual

attention; special tutorials for orals.

20 Marine Engineers R eview (I ndia ) August 2013

www.imare.in

News

Owner Prepares for Tier III NOx Regulations with ScR System

M itsui O.S.K. Lines, Ltd. Is set to test a Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) system across three power generators

of an MOL-operated oceangoing freighter to demonstrate NOx denitration under the actual operation of freighter, to meet the IMO's Tier III NOx regulations. The SCR system, which was jointly developed by MOL, Yanmar Co., Ltd. and Namura Shipbuilding Co., Ltd. , was verified by Class NK earlier this month, thereby ensuring it meets the NOx Tier III emission limit. The system was developed with support from ClassNK's "Joint R&D with Industries and Academic Partners" program. SCR catalytic reactor onboard the vessel includes bypass system which is onboard to save engine room space and allow greater flexibility in design. Space needed for peripheral equipment is reduced by integrating control of three units. The test operation on an actual vessel is scheduled to last about two years in order to observe operability and refilling of aqueous

in order to observe operability and refilling of aqueous urea, and ensure that all three SCR

urea, and ensure that all three SCR systems function properly under normal power generator operating conditions. Mitsui claims that long-term performance of the system can be maintained even if the engines use Bunker C and other fuels that contain high levels of impurities. MARPOL Annex VI regulates NOx emissions from vessels and diesel engines used on vessels built after 2016 will have to reduce NOx emissions by more than 80% from the Tier I NOx emission standards in ECAs, including North America. The SCR system will give Mitsui the opportunity to develop valuable operational experience with the new equipment and allow the liner to adapt with a slower, more measured phase-in period than if Mitsui neglected to react to the forthcoming legislation until it was enforced. As one of the strategies in its single-year management plan RISE 2013, Mitsui is searching to ways in which to reduce environmental pollution and enhance efficiency in line with its commitment to reduce costs. The strategy is three-pronged: Number one, to transform the business model of MOL through expansion of overseas and scaling back free tonnage; Secondly, to achieve a higher level of business intelligence to ensure continued strategic business decisions; Lastly, to reduce costs. Last month, this strategy paid off when MOL was recognised by the port of both Los Angeles and Long Beach, California, for its efforts to introduce slow steaming across its fleet. Both ports aim to encourage operators to slow down to 12 knots or less within a certain range of the ports to reduce emissions and offer annual rewards to vessel operators that achieve extraordinary

compliance percentages.

operators that achieve extraordinary compliance percentages. Issue Of Watch Keeping Certificates (WKC) and Tanker
Issue Of Watch Keeping Certificates (WKC) and Tanker Endorsement (TE) T he Institute of Marine
Issue Of Watch Keeping Certificates (WKC)
and Tanker Endorsement (TE)
T he Institute of Marine Engineers (India) has been authorized by Directorate General of shipping to issue Watch Keeping Certificates
(WKC) to Engine room ratings, and Tanker Endorsements (TE) to Engine Room Ratings, Engine Room Petty Officers and Engineer
Officer Trainees, vide addendum to NT/ENGG. Circular No. 12 of 2012 dated 16.04.2013.
The Facilitation Centre started its operation from 3rd of June 2013 at IMEI House, Sector-19,Plot No. 94, Nerul, Navi Mumbai. 400706.
The collection of relevant application form and documents has commenced from 3rd June on working days (Monday to Friday 1000 hrs
to 1300 hrs)
Applicants are advised to report along with the forms and documents as mentioned below.
1)
2)
3)
Application Form ( as per DGS-NT/ENGG. Cir. No. 12 of 2012)
Documents ( as per DGS-NT/ENGG. Cir. No. 12 of 2012)
Demand Drafts as Follows.
a) In case of application of WKC
1)
One DD for Rs. 1250/-favouring “Principal Officer MMD Mumbai”
AND
2)
One DD for Rs. 1685/- Service tax inclusive, favouring “The Institute of Marine Engineers (India)”
b) In case of application of Tanker Endorsements- TE (for each Endorsement)
1)
2)
One DD for Rs. 1000/-favouring “Principal Officer MMD Mumbai”
AND
One DD for Rs. 1124/- service tax inclusive, favouring “The Institute of Marine Engineers (India)”

News

closed Loop Scrubber cleaning Patent for Alfa Laval?

A lfa Laval Aalborg have applied for a patent for their new

cleaning apparatus that works on polluted scrubber fluid in

the exhaust gas scrubber fluid loop.

The patent application states: “The system reduces shortcomings of closed-loop scrubber systems by further improving environmental aspects of exhaust treatment procedures, improving the efficiency in exhaust treatment procedures, minimising the amount of waste material that needs to be handled and disposed and further minimising the need for service and diminishing problems with process equipment handling scrubber fluid.”

How does the system work? The disc stack centrifugal separator separates pollutants from scrubber fluid. The polluted scrubber fluid is then siphoned off from the scrubber fluid loop to be disposed of.

The separator includes a rotor enclosing a separation space with a stack of separating discs. A separator inlet extends into the separating space, with a first separator outlet for cleaned scrubber fluid extending from the separating space. The second separator outlet is for the pollutant phase extending from the separating space.

Earlier in the year, Alfa Laval won an order from MAN Diesel & Turbo to supply its Alfa Laval PureSOx scrubber for two

Turbo to supply its Alfa Laval PureSOx scrubber for two cruise ships had a value of

cruise ships had a value of SEK 55 million and delivery is scheduled for 2013 and 2014.

Alfa Laval Aalborg, of the former Aalborg Industries, offers a host of solutions across industries, of which scrubbers is but one. They offer marine boilers and heat exchangers, thermal fluid systems, inert gas systems, floating production systems, and industrial boilers.

The luxury cruise liners will benefit from a 98% reduction in sulphur oxides from its emissions.

“This order proves the technical acceptance among the largest players in the marine industry for our Alfa Laval PureSOx system,” said Lars Renström, President and CEO of the Alfa

Laval Group at the time.

President and CEO of the Alfa Laval Group at the time. 22 M arine E ngineers
President and CEO of the Alfa Laval Group at the time. 22 M arine E ngineers

22 Marine Engineers R eview (I ndia ) August 2013

www.imare.in

Technical

Titanic and the ISM code

Mr Vikrant Rai (F-3874)

Abstract

The sinking of Titanic has become one of the most well known disasters in history. It has become a metaphor for a disaster waiting to happen. It is now part of our mythology and we continue to find it fascinating. It sank on 14 April 1912 after a collision with a massive iceberg in less than 3 hours.

The following few examples clearly show that even prior to Titanic collisions happened at sea and there were loss of life:

A) White Star Ship Republic (15378 GRT, 525 Passenger, and

297 Crew) Collided with Lloyd Italiano liner Florida on 22 Jan 1909; bow crushed back to Collision bulkhead; 4 Passengers died due to impact; Passengers and crew were however rescued but Republic Sank.

B) Yoshino, a Japanese Cruiser collided with armoured Cruiser

Kasuga in dense fog on 15 May 1904 and sank with a loss of 319 lives.

C) On 30th January 1895, under stormy conditions in North Sea,

SS Elbe (4510GRT) with 354 passengers on board, collided with SS Crathie.

Shipping is known to be associated with the risk of losing ship and lives since the earliest days. In 1800’s many ships were lost; in the single year 1821-22 in North sea 2000 ships were lost with over 20,000 people on board and in between 1876 and 1892, 10,381 British ships were lost with about 27,000 mariners and 3600 passengers. The internationalization of shipping regulatory regime never took place because in those times all cause of casualties were defined as “force majeure” in order to remove liability. Moreover, the principle of economy being laissez faire, every intervention of governments was strongly rejected by ship owners and seafarers

{1}.

However, the industrial revolution causing rise in sea trade, shipping, shipbuilding and increased size of ships resulted in safety at sea gaining importance and ultimately maritime administrations and ship owners gave up under pressure of public opinion moved by high mortality on board ships.

The demise of Titanic was the seed sown for Internationalization of shipping regulatory regime when SOLAS was born in 1914. Before SOLAS was born, and during the 19th century regulations concerning safety varied from country to country, though,

significant move was made towards international regulations on ship safety in 1857 with the introduction of the International Code of Signal in 1863 when the Rule of the Road at sea was established as an international agreement aimed at avoiding collisions between ships.

The US and British Inquiry into Titanic sinking pointed fingers directly and indirectly at various aspects of the Ship design and operation. This included the sub-division of the vessel, lifeboat capacity and operation of ship which directly linked lack of emergency preparation to loss of lives. It indirectly pointed fingers on Risk Management in ships operation.

The purpose of this paper is to give an insight into the journey of SOLAS in last 100 Years and how the shipping regulations have changed from being correction to preventions especially in ship design and operations. It will deal with shift in regulatory regime from prescriptive/corrective to proactive/risk based/ preventive nature. It will also deal with how ISM code which is prevention based regulatory regime and its significance in prevention by relating it to the tragic Titanic demise.

The SOLAS Journey- Last 100 Years- From Prescriptive towards Goal/Risk Based

Someone has said it well that “Revelations breed Regulations”. It is well said for shipping: “No one notices us when things are going right.” When high-profile accidents have thrust shipping into the public eye, societal concern has often prompted significant regulatory changes.

The First 50 Years- A Slow and correction Based Journey

The first 50 years of SOLAS Journey was exactly as said above. The provision of adequate life saving equipment was the primary topic when the first International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea met in 1914, in response to the Titanic disaster. In the early Twentieth Century very little attention was paid to containing and extinguishing fires in ships. The 1914 Convention did however give some consideration to fire hazards. This was largely because of the public impact of the loss of the small British emigrant carrier Volturno (3,581 tons) which had been destroyed by fire in mid- Atlantic the previous year with the loss of 136 lives.

The outbreak of World War I prevented entry of SOLAS in 1915, although many provisions were adapted by individual nations. However in 1929, 18 countries attended another international

However in 1929, 18 countries attended another international Republic Yoshino Elbe M arine E ngineers R

Republic

Yoshino

Elbe

Technical

conference, which adopted a new SOLAS Convention, which entered into force in 1933. A third SOLAS was adopted in 1948- which was a greatly expanded version and covered a variety of ships including Cargo ships of 500gt and above with detailed requirements. The 1948 SOLAS was again corrective in nature and included non-combustible construction regulations which today form the basis of Fire safety regulations for passenger ships- again due to lessons learnt from investigation of the Morro Castle Fire, and thus placed great emphasis on Fire safety on board by including three new parts D, E and F.

In 1960 another SOLAS Convention was adopted which can be considered a landmark regulatory move in following two aspects:

- Creation of IMO to develop and maintain a comprehensive regulatory frame work for shipping.

- It adopted an amendment adoption procedure which stated that amendments will enter into force 12 months after being accepted by 2/3rd of contracting parties to the parent convention. This was a setback to the efforts to respond to the lessons learnt from major disasters and keep the SOLAS convention in line with technical developments. This was in essence a delay in implementation of the corrective action.

This ERA was basically an implementation of corrective action era, though some advances taken from War ships were implemented.

The Next Half A century 1960-2012 of Forward Movement- 50 Years of correction and Prevention.

The 1960 SOLAS had delayed implementation of corrective action by adopting above stated amendment adoption procedure. With a smaller number of contracting governments, ratification of amendments were fast, but as more and more countries ratified SOLAS, it was found difficult to meet ratification criterion of 2/3rd of parties to parent convention.

However this decade can always be referred as an era of fast corrective and preventive actions.

The next SOLAS adopted in 1974 and later on was a period of progressive developments on following two accounts:

A) It adopted the Tacit acceptance procedure where in all amendments would enter into force by a certain specified date unless rejected by 1/3rd of contracting parties or parties whose combined merchant fleets represents not less than 50% of world gross tonnage. The usual time frame from circulation of proposed amendments through to entry into force is 24 months. A resolution adopted in 1994 however, makes provision for an accelerated amendment procedure to be used in exceptional circumstances - allowing the entire process to be cut to 12 months. To gain acceptance, amendments are often only mandatory for ships built after a specified date.

B) For the first time Risk based approach in shipping were introduced as an alternative to deterministic damage stability regulations and it should provide at least same degree of safety as by the deterministic damage stability regulations. The revision of SOLAS Ch.II-2 concerning fire protection was finalized in 2000. It adopted an approach where safety objectives and functional requirements are formulated initially and where these are to be achieved either by compliance with

24 Marine Engineers R eview (I ndia ) August 2013

the included prescriptive requirements or by alternative design and arrangements based on engineering analysis to be evaluated and approved by the Administration. The IMO adopted International Goal based Ship Construction Standards for Bulk Carriers and Oil Tankers(l>=150m), along with amendments to Chapter II-1 of the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS), making their application mandatory, with an entry into force date of 1 January 2012. It will require new ships to be designed and constructed for a specified design life and to be safe and environmentally friendly, in intact and specified damage conditions, throughout their life. Under the regulation, ships should have adequate strength, integrity and stability to minimize the risk of loss of the ship or pollution to the marine environment due to structural failure, including collapse, resulting in flooding or loss of watertight integrity.

Analysis- correction and Prevention Regime.

integrity. Analysis- correction and Prevention Regime. Prescriptive VS Goal Based Design[6] In the last 40 years

Prescriptive VS Goal Based Design[6]

In the last 40 years IMO has moved towards a journey of Prevention and Correction. Though it is often suggested that for optimal allocations of available natural and financial resources, Risk based designs are very important. It is equally important to note that Risk is function of Probability of occurrence of an event and severity of its consequences. This occurrence of an event though

is a combination of many factors (e.g. for collisions, the factors

can be traffic density, navigation, human factors, environmental conditions etc.), it is also a distillation of past experience (statistics) same like Prescriptive requirements.

Derbyshire, a 5 year old capsize bulk carrier sank in 1980 and the investigations revealed that the unimagined abnormal wave of 14m height and failure of forward ventilator openings and cargo hold hatch covers led to implementation of SOLAS CH XII.

Prescriptive and Risk based regulatory regime has to go hand in

hand so that we are able to learn from our past experience and also

do not sit ideal on our past laurels till something happens.

Titanic and The ISM code

A question that crosses my mind every time when I hear or read

about Titanic is:

Were the Seeds of the Present day ISM Code sown on 14 April

1912 with the sinking of the Titanic? Are these seeds watered by subsequent disasters at Sea to be grown as the ISM Tree adopted

as an amendment to SOLAS in 1994 and entered into force on 1 July 1998.

I try to look for answers to following points before finding any answer to the above question.

1. Was the Design of Titanic Flawed?

A) One of the Key recommendations of the British Board of Trade Inquiry report was:

www.imare.in

Technical

Technical Better watertight compartmenting schemes, (which includes both: a) fitting of watertight decks at a convenient

Better watertight compartmenting schemes, (which includes both: a) fitting of watertight decks at a convenient distance above waterline and b) double skin up to waterline or fitting of longitudinal vertical watertight bulkhead on each side of the vessel) both to reduce the likelihood of a ships sinking and to keep the ship on an even keel if the watertight compartments get filled. A bulkhead committee was set up to analyze this.

The above shows that Court speculated that some loss of life could have been avoided if the Titanic’s watertight compartments have been more efficiently designed.

B) The lower section of the Titanic was divided into sixteen major watertight compartments that could easily be sealed off if part of the hull was punctured and leaking water. After the collision with the iceberg, the hull portion of six of these sixteen compartments was damaged as above shown. Sealing off the compartments was completed immediately after the damage was realized by way of shutting off the watertight doors between the compartments, but as the bow of the ship began to pitch forward from the weight of the water in that area of the ship, the water in some of the compartments began to spill over into adjacent compartments. Although compartments were called watertight they were actually only watertight horizontally; their tops were open and the walls extended only a few feet above the waterline. If transverse bulkheads (the walls of the watertight compartments that are positioned across the width of the ship) had been a few feet taller, the water would have been contained within the damaged compartments. Consequently, the sinking ship would have been slowed, possibly allowing enough time for nearby ships to help. However, because of the extensive flooding of the bow compartments and the subsequent flooding of the entire ship, the Titanic was gradually pulled below the waterline.

C) The Titanic was designed to survive a head on collision that would have flooded the first four compartments or for a side on collision flooding a maximum of two compartments.

The question that is often asked is how a compartment can be watertight if the walls do not extend all the way up. The answer is that the height of two watertight bulkheads is calculated by taking

the volume of the compartment that is created between them and assuming the compartment is completely flooded and subtracts that volume from the ship’s displacement. If the tops of the bulkheads are tall enough to be above the ship’s new load draft line after losing the subject compartment, then water will not rise over the tops, even if the affected compartment isn’t capped by a watertight deck, the bulkheads are still considered to be watertight.

Analysis: It is important to understand that any design, whether it is for a ship or an airplane, must be done in anticipation of potential failures. In the case of Titanic, the engineers would have been asking themselves:

“What if we have a hole in the hull?”

Well, water is going to come in.

How much water?

That depends on how big the hole is!

So the designer has to make this calculation and you can always imagine a bigger hole or some worse condition.

Moreover, engineering and design are an important part of any construction project, but they are part of a larger system that includes the people that will manage and use the project’s end product, whether it is an ocean liner or spacecraft.

The above all clearly shows that there is no design which can ensure that no incident/accident/disaster will ever take place and we have to be prepared to deal with emergencies.

2. Though Lifeboats on the ship met regulatory standards of 1912, still it was not sufficient for all the people on board?

It is said that the British government’s Board of Trade allowed Titanic to sail with insufficient lifeboat accommodation. The government simply had not kept abreast of advances in marine engineering and based all life-saving regulations on ships up to 10,000 grt (gross registered tons) which were required to carry 16 lifeboats. Titanic was 46,329 grt. A ship designed to accommodate 3,511 passengers and crew was only required to provide lifeboat accommodation for 962. In fact, White Star provided her with four extra collapsible boats, increasing capacity to 1,178.

Technical

However, the facts are that the passengers were reluctant to leave the safety of the ship initially and many boats were launched partially empty. With “Women and children first” the imperative for loading lifeboats, Second Officer, who was loading boats on the port side, only allowed men to board if oarsmen were needed, even if there was room. First Officer, who was loading boats on the starboard side, let men on board if women were absent. As the ship increasingly began to settle by the head, people started to become more nervous and some lifeboats began leaving fully loaded. By 02:05, the entire bow was under water, but two of the lifeboats had still not been launched.

The above shows that no lessons had been learnt from SS Elbe which sank in 1895. Within 20 minutes of the collision, the Elbe had sunk and the only survivors were the 20 people in the one surviving lifeboat. Though the Captain gave the order to abandon ship, amid great scenes of panic the crew managed to lower two of the Elbe’s lifeboats. One of the lifeboats capsized as too many passengers tried in vain to squeeze into the boat. Twenty people scrambled into the second lifeboat, of which 15 were members of the crew. It is worthwhile to note that SS Elbe was 4510 grt and lifeboat requirements were in force till passenger ships of 10000 grt at that time.

The above facts clearly indicate lack of emergency preparedness; the crew were not given any standard emergency instructions as can be seen from 1st officer allowing men to board and 2nd officer not allowing the same. Even if boats would have provided for all the people, unless the passengers are briefed what to do in an emergency and crew is clear about their roles, it would have been difficult to board all the passengers on the lifeboats. Another case of lack of emergency preparedness.

3. In an era of no STcW convention were the Master and crew of Titanic competent? If yes, were they competent/prepared to deal with emergencies?

Over the past hundred years, training has moved from being localized and unregulated to a global footing and is now subject to close international scrutiny. The STCW Convention in 1978 established international benchmarks in training and since being amended in 1995 and 2010.

The glaring failures in emergency management can be sighted in below mentioned points indicated by the inquiry reports:

- No general alarm was sounded, no whistle blown and no systematic warning was given to the endangered passengers, and it was fifteen or twenty minutes after the collision before Captain Smith ordered the Titanic’s wireless operator to send out a distress message.

- The Titanic’s crew were only meagrely acquainted with their positions and duties in an accident and only one drill was held before the maiden trip. Many of the crew joined the ship only a few hours before she sailed and were in ignorance of their positions until the following Friday.

- ”Officers and crew were strangers to one another. … When the crisis came there was a state of absolute unpreparedness … Titanic’s crew had never acted as a team to lower the ship’s boats. … Untrained and untried, and … unfamiliar with the lifeboats’ capacity … [they failed] to utilize lifeboats to their capacity … [resulting] in the needless sacrifice of several hundred lives which might otherwise have been saved”.

26 Marine Engineers R eview (I ndia ) August 2013

Here it is worthwhile to mention that the Master, 2/O and 4/O held an Extra Masters Certificate and the other officers which included C/O, 1/O, 3/O, 5/0 and 6/O were Masters Certificate holders.

Analysis: This clearly states that whatever be the competencies or qualifications, there is one thing you cannot take away from this tragedy; it is remembering that emergency drills can and do save lives. A majority of people roll their eyes at the mention of emergency drills; many fail to take part and the ones that do usually just go through the motions. In the event of an emergency these people would have known where to locate a life jacket and where to evacuate. Boring, perhaps, but life saving, quite possibly.

4. How was Risk Managed on Titanic? Since the time I have been sailing I have always noted that though ISM had not been implemented, Risk Management was always a part of Maritime culture.

Let us look at some facts:

In reviewing the active failures that led to the disaster, we begin with Captain Smith. Captains are ultimately responsible for everything that happens on the ship. When he was informed of an ice field ahead, Captain Smith did not reduce his speed. He considered the fact that it was a clear night with good visibility and that no ice fields were in sight.

Titanic rushed onward on her true course, one recognized as appropriate … yet dangerous at this season of the year, when the Labrador Current may be bearing vast masses of ice across the track of ships.

Ice positions were so definitely reported to the Titanic just preceding the accident located ice on both sides of the track or lane which the Titanic was following.

Captain Smith’s assumed, based on his past successful experience, was that Titanic could establish visual contact with any iceberg in front of the ship in sufficient time to manoeuvre and avoid it.

Wireless Officer Phillips was responsible for sending and receiving messages on the one radio channel available at the time. He placed priority on sending out personal messages. While he did receive and pass on some iceberg warnings, he asked the senders to stop transmitting them

No general discussion took place among the officers; no conference was called to consider these warnings; no heed was given to them. The speed was not relaxed, the lookout was not increased. Basically No Risk Management

conclusions

The Regulatory regime in last 100 years has moved from an era of prescriptive requirements which were mainly a distillation of past experience to an era of Risk based prescriptive requirements. We often complain about two many regulations and when something happens always blame the regulatory authorities for the lack of vision. Henry Petroski has aptly said the following:

The Cycles of success and failure: When we have prolonged period of success, we tend to become overconfident and complacent that what we are doing is right, and we have finally got it figured out. And then failure occurs and we look more closely at what we have been doing and discover that in fact we have not been building

www.imare.in

Technical

perfects ships, machines and systems. Everything has to evolve and enough scope should be given for this evolution. Presently IMO pro-activeness is an indication of coming to age by not getting caught this cycle of success and failure.

Moreover there is nothing called a perfect design as any design is made in anticipation of potential failures. The anticipation is the probability, which is again a distillation of past experience among other factors. Therefore, it is important that we understand the necessity of continuous Risk assessment and management and emergency preparedness. In this regard ISM Code can be considered a landmark piece of legislation in shipping.

References:

1. System and Risk approach to ship safety, with special emphasis of stability; Lech Kobylinski; Archives of Civil and Mechanical Engineering, Vol VII;

2. Latest IMO Developments On Fire Protection; Downloaded From Google Worldwide Website on 20 August 2012; www.

imo.org/blast/blastData.asp?doc_id=8969&filename

pdf -

3. Focus on IMO; Surviving disaster-life saving at Sea; January 2000; Downloaded from Google Worldwide Website on 31 August 2012; www.imo.org/OurWork/Safety/Regulations/ Documents/surviving.FIN.pdf - Cached

4. Introduction to Risk-Based Approaches in the Maritime Industry; Pierre C. Sames; Downloaded from Google Worldwide Website on 31 August 2012; rd.springer.com/

chapter/10.1007/978-3-540-89042-3_1

5. GOAL-BASED STANDARDS – A NEW APPROACH TO THE INTERNATIONAL REGULATION OF SHIP CONSTRUCTION; H. Hoppe, Maritime Safety Division, International Maritime Organization; Downloaded from Google Worldwide Website on 31 August 2012; www.imo.org/ ourwork/safety/shipdesign/documents/goal.pdf

6. Passenger Ship Safety – Science Paving the Way; Dracos Vassalos, Andrzej Jasionowski, Luis Guarin, The Ship Stability Research Centre (SSRC), Department of Naval Architecture

and Marine Engineering, The Universities of Glasgow and Strathclyde, UK, Safety at Sea Ltd (SaS), Glasgow, UK; ; Downloaded from Google Worldwide Website on 31 August 2012; www.safety-at-sea.co.uk/pdf/2005_Passenger_Ship_ Safety.pdf

7.

T

he Practicalities of Goal-Based Safety Regulation; By

J Penny, A Eaton CAA (SRG), PG Bishop, RE Bloomfield (Adelard); Downloaded from Google Worldwide Website on 31 August 2012; www.adelard.com/papers/scsc2001_sw01.pdf

8.

Safety in shipping: The human element; By Catherine Hetherington, Rhona Flin, Kathryn Mearns; Downloaded from Google Worldwide Website on 1 September 2012; www.abdn. ac.uk/iprc/documents/safety_in_shipping.pdf -

9.

HUMAN ELEMENT IN SHIPPING ACCIDENTS; By Lee Seng Kong, Director (Shipping/Corporate Communications) Maritime and Port Authority of Singapore; Downloaded from Google Worldwide Website on 1 September 2012; www. itfglobal.org/seafarers/icons-site/images/maritime_PA.pdf

10.

Passenger Ship Disasters- Part 1; Downloaded From Google Worldwide Website on 20 August 2012; www.shipsnostalgia. com/guides/Passenger_Ship_Disasters_-_Part_1 -

11.

The limits of technological solutions to sustainable development; By M.H. Huesemann; Downloaded from Google World Wide Website on 15 October 2012; content. csbs.utah.edu/ /Huesemann_The%20Limits%20to%20

Technological%20Solutions.pdf

12.

MANAGING THE HUMAN ELEMENT IN MODERN

SHIP DESIGN AND OPERATION; By R V Pomeroy and B

M Sherwood Jones Lloyd’s Register of Shipping, London,

UK; Downloaded From Google Worldwide Website on 15 September 2012; general.marinefiles.net/ /MANAGING%20

THE%20HUMAN%20ELEMENT%20IN%20MODERN.

Author is Surveyor with Lloyds Register of Shipping

The Institute of Marine Engineers (India), Kochi Branch

(An ISO 9001:2008 Certified Institute & Approved by DGS)

IME(I) House,No.29/427, South Janatha Road, Vyttila, Kochi-682019 Tel: 0484-2302491, Mob.09388609429, Mob:09446865845, e.mail:imcochin@sify.com

Registration opened for following courses

MEO class II (F.G.)

MEO class III (NcV - c/E) - 4 Months course commencing 15 th of every month. MEO class IV (F.G.) Non-mandatory -one month condensed course commencing 1 st working day of every month.

- 4 months Preparatory course commencing 15 th of every month.

Engine Room Simulator - Operational / Management Level will be arranged at KM School of Marine Engineering, cochin, Kerala

courses are conducted by highly experienced faculty.

For enquiries please contact:

SUNIL XAVIER, Principal.

Tel : 0484 - 2302491 Personal Mob: 09895096067

Technical

Preliminary Report of MSc92

The 92nd session of the IMO Maritime Safety Committee (MSC92) was held at the headquarters of the IMO in London from 12 to 21 June 2013. A summary of the outcome is given hereunder for your information. Please note that this summary has been made based on informal information obtained from participants from ClassNK and Working Papers distributed during MSC92 with priority given to disseminating the information as early as practicable.

1. Adopted mandatory requirements

(1) Passenger ship safety (SOLAS III/19) Outline: To require that on a ship engaged on a voyage where passengers are scheduled to be on board for more than 24 hours, musters of newly-embarked passengers shall take place prior to or immediately upon departure. Applied: on and after 1 January 2015 (2) Enclosed space entry and rescue drills (SOLAS III/19 etc.) Outline: To require that crew members with enclosed space entry or rescue responsibilities shall participate in an enclosed space entry and rescue drill to be held on board the ship at least once every two months. Applied: on and after 1 January 2015 (3) Amendments to the IMSBC Code Outline: To amend the IMSBC Code to enhance the safety of carriage of cargoes that may liquefy. Applied: on and after 1 January 2015 (4) Amendments to the ISM Code Part A Outline: To require that company should ensure that each ship is manned appropriately and that an additional internal audit should be carried out to the ship. Applied: on and after 1 January 2015 (5) Adoption of the RO Code Outline: A newly established code to provide guidance on a flag state’s recognition and oversight of ROs (Recognized Organizations), which clarifies the responsibilities of flag states and ROs, and regulates minimum criteria against which organizations are assessed towards recognition and oversight by flag states. Applied: on and after 1 January 2015

2. Approved mandatory requirements Mandatory requirements were approved at MSC92 as follows:

which are expected to be considered for adoption at MSC93 (scheduled to be held in May 2014) and come into effect on 1 January 2016:

(1) Amendments to SOLAS II-2 to expand the scope of application of current requirements for the installation of inert gas systems (IGS) on tankers of 20,000 tonnes deadweight and upwards to tankers of 8,000 tonnes deadweight and upwards, and revision of the FSS Code Chapter 15 on IGS. (2) Amendments to SOLAS II-2/13 to require two means of escape from machinery control rooms and main workshops. (3) Amendments to SOLAS II-2/10 to require that ships with open- top container holds shall be provided with Water Mist Lance and Mobile Water Monitor. (4) New regulation SOLAS II-2/20-1 to regulate additional requirements for ships carrying hydrogen and compressed natural gas vehicles. (5) Revision of the IGC Code taking into account novel technologies and methodologies for transportation as well as upsizing of ships in relation to liquefied gas. (6) Amendments to the IBC Code and the IGC Code concerning

carriage requirements for stability instruments on board chemical tankers and gas carriers (including existing vessels). (Amendments to MARPOL Annex I concerning oil tankers have been approved at MEPC65 and are expected to be adopted at MEPC66 (March

2014).)

(7) Amendments to SOLAS III to make the guidelines mandatory concerning periodical inspections and maintenance of launching appliances and on-load release gears of lifeboats.

(8) Amendments to SOLAS II-1/29 to accept the alternative methods to verify the performance of steering gears when it is impracticable to demonstrate the turning test at the deepest seagoing draught.

3. Plans and procedures for recovery of persons from the water

SOLAS III/17-1, which was adopted at MSC91 (November 2012), requires plans and procedures for recovery of persons from the water to be kept on board both new ships and existing ships from 1 July 2014. (Ships constructed before 1 July 2014 shall comply with this requirement by the first periodical or renewal safety equipment survey of the ship to be carried out after 1 July 2014 whichever comes first.)

In order to facilitate the preparation of these plans and procedures, ClassNK, in cooperation with the industry, developed a sample format and submitted it to MSC92 through the Japanese Government.

At this session, the sample format was well noted among member states without specific comments.

This sample format can be downloaded from our website:

(classnk.or.jp/hp/en/info_service/imo_and_iacs/topics_imo.html)

4 GBS (Goal-Based Standards for the design and construction of new ships)

While SOLAS and other conventions allow the Administrations and classification societies to approve equivalents and/or alternative design, the unified methods to verify the equivalency have not yet been globally established.

Therefore, MSC90 agreed to develop guidelines for the approval of equivalents and alternatives based on Safety Level Approach (SLA), and a correspondence group (CG) has been discussing this matter.

MSC92 discussed the draft guidelines developed by the CG for finalization and approved them as non-mandatory guidelines.

5. Approval of guidelines etc.

The following guidelines were developed during MSC92. (IACS UIs shown as below are available from our website (http://www. classnk.or.jp/hp/en/index.html) or that of IACS (http://www.iacs. org.uk/).)

Technical

(1) Unified interpretations based on UI SC149 (Rev.2) were approved, clarifying that two portable instruments as required in SOLAS II-2/4.5.7.1 are to be provided for measuring flammable vapor concentrations and oxygen, respectively.

(2) Unified interpretations were approved, clarifying that the current regulation does not require the installation of fire detection devices to cargo control spaces, in relation to SOLAS II-2/7.5.5.

(3) Unified interpretations based on UI SC245 (corr.1) were approved, clarifying the areas to be insulated to A-60 class standards with regard to suction and delivery pipes.

(4) Unified interpretations were approved, clarifying the place to be fitted with isolation valves for the fire main system in tankers, in relation to SOLAS II-2/10.2.1.4.4.

(5) Unified interpretations were approved based on UI SC250 (Corr.1), clarifying that fixed gas fire-extinguishing systems within the cargo holds, required by SOLAS II-2/10.7.1.3 and 10.7.2, can be used to control the self-heating of the cargo.

(6) Unified interpretations based on UI SC252 were approved, clarifying that in relation to FSS Code 5.2.2.2, the “positive means” for the sequential operation of fixed gas fire extinguishing systems is to be achieved by a mechanical and/or electrical interlock that does not depend on any operational procedures.

(7) Unified interpretations on the technical provisions for permanent means of access for inspections required by SOLAS II-1/3-6 were approved as the amendments to MSC.1/Circ.1176 and MSC.1/Circ.1197. The amendments are based on UI SC191 (Rev.4), however, it was agreed to delete the interpretations that openings for passage may be reduced (Technical Provision para. 3.10 and 3.11) and not to include them in the circular.

(8) Unified interpretations based on UI SC179 (Rev.2) on the remote control of dewatering of forward spaces of bulk carriers required by SOLAS XII/13 were approved.

(9) Unified interpretations on IMO performance standard for protective coatings (PSPC) for ballast tanks required by SOLAS II- 1/3-2 were approved. While they are based on UI SC223 (Rev.2), some modifications are made such as deletion of interpretations on the acceptance of alternative systems.

(10) Unified interpretations based on UI SC254 were approved, clarifying the strength and testing standards to be satisfied by fall preventer devices required by MSC.1/Circ.1392 and MSC.1/Circ.1327.

(11) Unified interpretations based on UI SC255 were approved, clarifying the fuel pump arrangement when low sulphur fuel oils are used in emission control areas and other marine fuels are primarily used in non-restricted areas.

(12) Unified interpretations on clarification of greatest launching height for a free-fall lifeboat in the LSA Code were approved with modifications to UI SC248 to add the interpretations on “water surface” and to correct the interpretations on heel angles.

(13) Unified interpretations were approved, clarifying that the date of “delivery”, referred to as an application date of conventions, means the completion date of the survey. The interpretations are based on UI SC256 and UI MPC100, adding the definition of the date of delivery to the interpretations of the date of contract in

MSC-MEPC.5/Circ.4.

(14) Guidelines for capacity of electric inclinometers were adopted.

6. Passenger ship safety

In responding to the Costa Concordia incident, which occurred in January 2012 in Italy, MSC90 discussed to enhance the safety measures for passenger ships. As a result, it was agreed to classify the countermeasures into two categories: operational safety measures to be implemented speedily (short-term measures) and safety measures to be implemented after the examination based on the outcome of the investigation (long-term measures).

At this session, based on the investigation report submitted from Italy, the tentative recommended voluntary measures developed as short-term measures at MSC91 (November 2012) were reviewed. Further, as long-term measures, the items to be technically examined were sorted out as follows:

(1) To expand the revision of damage stability regulations by the Sub-committee on Stability, Load Lines and Fishing Vessels Safety (SLF) to include consideration to limit the down flooding points on the bulkhead deck for passenger ships.

(2) To consider the installation of onboard stability computer or having access to shore-based support.

(3) To consider the redundancy of emergency power.

(4) To review the adequacy of passenger ship specific safety training in the STCW Convention at the next session of the Sub- Committee on Standards of Training and Watchkeeping (STW).

7. Review and reform of the organization

The IMO has been considering the review and reform of the sub- committees to facilitate efficient discussion and to reduce the cost. It was proposed by the Secretary-General to rearrange the existing nine sub-committees as seven committees as shown in the following table.

This proposal was agreed by MEPC65 (May 2013) and MSC92. The final discussion will be conducted at the incoming IMO Assembly in November 2013.

New Sub-committees

Relations to the current sub-committees

SDC: Ship Design and Construction

The following three sub-committees are rearranged into two: (1) DE: Ship Design and Equipment (2) FP: Fire Protection (3) SLF: Stability, Load Lines and Fishing Vessels Safety

SSE: Ship System and Equipment

PPR: Pollution Protection and Response

The following two sub-committees are rearranged into two: (1) BLG: Bulk Liquids and Gases (2) DSC: Dangerous Goods, Solid Cargoes and Containers

CCC: Carriage of Cargoes and Containers

III: Implementation of IMO Instruments

FSI (Flag State Implementation) is renamed.

NCSR: Navigation, Communications and Search and Rescue

The following two sub-committees are rearranged into one: (1) NAV: Safety of Navigation (2) COMSAR: Radiocommunications and Search and Rescue

HTW: Human Element, Training and Watchkeeping

STW (Standards of Training and Watchkeeping) is renamed.

30 M arine E ngineers R eview (I ndia ) August 2013 w w w

30 Marine Engineers R eview (I ndia ) August 2013

www.imare.in

General

Lack of well-being impacts upon performance and introduces unacceptable risks that detract from the safe operation of the vessel”. Alert UK, Jan-2012

MLc beyond DMLc

Shantanu Paul

O n 20 th August 2013, the Maritime Labour Convention 2006 (MLC 2006) will enter into force internationally. The day will

surely be remembered as a red-letter day in the history of merchant shipping for the reorganization of seafarers’ “Bill of Rights" by the “Super Convention” which will now be the “Fourth Pillar” of the international regulatory regime for “Quality Shipping”. While the first three phrases are MLC 2006 jargons and well conceived today, the idea of the fourth one although embedded in the objectives of IMO (International Maritime Organization), appears incomplete in the context of this ILO (International Labour Organization) Convention. It is said that- quality shipping includes the ship, its operator, its flag and the seafarers working and living aboard ship- but what about the seafarer! Can quality shipping be achieved without quality seafarers? Do ship-owners have any obligation in this respect? These are the questions that have often haunted me while teaching in the MLC course for seafarers since last two years.

As a matter of fact MLC 2006 is emphasizing more on the “hygiene factor” rather than the “motivating factor” of seafarers onboard ship. Motivated seafarer is often perceived as quality seafarer - a vital element for achieving quality shipping and that is mostly in the hands of ship-owners rather than regulators. Reputed shipping companies have always taken the matter seriously for maintaining a pool of quality seafarers. At this juncture when the shipping companies are bogged down with the compliance of the Convention, mainly the 14 items of DMLC (Declaration of Maritime Labour Compliance) Part-I of the respective Flag State, it may be prudent to pay some attention beyond DMLC, primarily factors that motivate seafarers such as shore leave, arguably a seafarer’s right that is compromised quite often, for the realization of true quality shipping in the 21 st century.

In fact MLC 2006 is based on the philosophy that a happy crew is safer and more efficient. However happiness is often achieved by the fulfillment of higher order of human needs. Nevertheless without fulfillment of the basic needs happiness can not be achieved. The Convention gives seafarers the right to visit doctor including dentist ashore under Reg. 4.1 and makes provision for shore leave and access to shore-based welfare facility under Reg. 2.4 and Reg. 4.4, respectively. While only Reg. 4.1 is part of DMLC, a “certified item”, the attention of imprudent ship-owners towards this vital issue may remain unchanged. However it may be worth noting that Reg.2.4 is an “inspection item” for the Flag State if not for the Port State. Although PSC (Port State Control) detention is apparently unheard of on shore leave issues, but may now lead to a complaint- a right given to seafarers under MLC 2006. Possibly for this reason the guideline of Reg. 4.4 clearly

mentions in the last point that “every effort should be made by those responsible in port and on board a ship to facilitate shore leave for seafarers as soon as possible after a ship’s arrival in port”- in foreign port. However, operational and emergency requirements should be given due consideration.

Shore leave is not a luxury. It is essential for seafarers who spend many weeks cooped up at their workplace, with only work mates and managers for company. At the end of a long voyage if seafarers’ shore leave is declined due to some pretext of security issues or shorter port stays, possibly that is the most de-motivating factor that can affect the performance of seafarers for running the ship safely and efficiently- for quality shipping. Existing Indian national provisions substantially cover several MLC 2006 requirements, but for shore leave a CBA (Collective Bargaining Agreement) is yet to be made as identified in the “legislative gap analysis” of the M.S. Act. On 20 th August this year, while we celebrate the Sadhbhavna (having good feeling for others) Divas in India- let’s have some

good feeling for our seafarers also!

let’s have some good feeling for our seafarers also! Advertise in the MER (I) If you
Advertise in the MER (I) If you have any product or service which finds applications
Advertise in the MER (I)
If you have any product or service which finds
applications in the Maritime Industry (Shipping,
Ports, Navy, Coastguard, Offshore) then the MER
(I) is the ideal medium to promote your products or
service.
This monthly technical journal is distributed free to
the Members of the Institute of Marine Engineers
(India). Many of the readers of this journal are the
top decision makers in the Maritime Industry and
journal is on their desks all through the month.
Ask now for our Advertisement Rates.
You will be surprised !
INSTITUTE OF MARINE
ENGINEERS (INDIA)
IMEI HOUSE, SECTOR 19, PLOT 94, NERUL,
NAVI MUMBAI 400 706.
TEL. : +91 22 27701664 / 27706749
FAx : +91 22 27711663 URL : www.imare.in
32 M arine E ngineers R eview (I ndia ) August 2013 w w w

32 Marine Engineers R eview (I ndia ) August 2013

www.imare.in

Technical

Spectacles in the bilges!

Sachchidanand Dhar (FEx-0350) & Parth Panwalkar (A-6018)

Extract:

It is aimed at all those seafarers who wear spectacles of some kind. Though prudence always recommends an extra pair of glasses in the baggage, yet there may be unfortunate occasions of loss of spectacles on board - in the bilges, overboard, in machinery spaces, cargo and ballast spaces, due to damage in the workshop, when on shore leave etc.

This article discusses an ALTERNATIVE SHORT TERM REPLACEMENT in cases of emergency – “The Lens Free Spectacles”, also known as Pinhole Glasses or Stenopeic Glasses. These do not require any glass or lens. These can be made from any Hard Opaque Plastic Sheet, Aluminium Foil or Cardboard, and a frame to hold the same. If one is ashore, any leaf of any plant will do too. All one needs to do is to pierce it with a thorn. In case of non-availability of these materials, one can even use one's finger -by bending it.

Introduction:

Vision defects are associated mostly with inability of pupil to focus correctly. The image does not focus correctly on the cornea; it either focuses before it or behind it. Currently-In-Vogue method is to place transparent lenses of appropriate focal length in front of the eye to correct the focusing defect. But this technology has only been commercially available with the advent of industrial Rrevolution in the 16t h century, whereas vision problems are likely to have been with human kind for as long as human kind has been. One wonders whether Pre 16th century humans had any method to correct the defect!

Well it seems that they did have something.

In her book Eyes and Vision, Dr. Lea Hyvärinen ( a Finnish ophthalmologist ) reports having seen metal pinhole glasses from India - that are believed to be 1,000 years old - at the Museum of Medical History in Helsinki.

They were first formally demonstrated in 1575 by Scheiner , a mathematician, physicist, and Astronomer.

On May 22 of year 1934, Charles C. Guthrie of Pittsburgh, PA obtained US patent no. 1,959,915 for lens-less spectacles. Pinhole glasses have clearly been in commercial use since that time. One can see this patent at “patent US1959915”, in patent search for U.S.A. patents.

But an even earlier patent was granted to Franz Heilborn of Breslau, Germany, on July 21, 1896. Patent #564,518 is labelled simply “eyeglasses” (whereas Guthrie’s invention was called “lens-less spectacles”). Heilborn’s glasses have a series of pinholes arranged in a radial pattern.

The Principle and the Gadget:

The principle is that a pinhole would help the correct focusing of image, when the mechanisms within the eye are not able to do it.

All it takes is a suitably thin & opaque (paper, aluminium foil, leaf of a plant, anything similar will do) sheet with a SINGLE pinhole of diameter 0.5 to 1 mm, placed in front of one of the eyes (other eye closed) to make one notice the difference in quality of viewing. This can also be used in case of emergency, or when in a hurry.(Ref. Fig.1)

Two such pieces of sheets with pinholes can be used to replace lenses in an spectacle frame. It can correct both kind of defects - near sightedness and far sightedness - simultaneously.(Ref. Fig.2)

Commercially available Pinhole spectacles have several pinholes, arranged in Linear or Radial fashion.(Ref. Fig.3)

The Mudraas:

But it may not even be necessary to have any physical or material item to test the efficacy of the concept OR for use in case of emergent situations.

Vaayu Mudraa (Ref. Fig.4)and Sanjeevanee Mudraa (Ref.Fig.5)- of Hath Yogic System - tend to create pinholes between Index fingers, Thumb and the palm. When in a hurry, it is possible to view through pinhole fashioned in this manner, and read OR see something afar clearer than with naked eyes.

The above mentioned Mudras are unlike the long term methods recommended by seers of yore, viz. seeing the morning rising sun, through a barrier of flowing water to help prevent any problem to eyesight, and also help strengthen weak eyes. These Mudras are emergency replacement for lost spectacles, as per authors’ suggestion – in true Marine Engineering tradition of using anything for anything.

Yogic texts may have elaborated some other benefits of these Mudras, totally unrelated to authors’ suggestions.

Advantages: Can be quickly resorted to, in case of emergent situations.

Can be quickly resorted to, in case of emergent situations. M arine E ngineers R eview
Can be quickly resorted to, in case of emergent situations. M arine E ngineers R eview
Can be quickly resorted to, in case of emergent situations. M arine E ngineers R eview

Technical

Disadvantages: Restricts field of vision.

conclusion:

Knowledge of possibility of improving eyesight by external aids, without the now so common lenses, has been around for quite some centuries.

With the advent of precisely ground lenses and beautified frames, idea of seeing through a pinhole had been relegated to near oblivion. But spectacles based on this principle are available again in the market and can be searched on the internet.

Knowledge of the basic principle can be very useful to a seafarer - or any traveller, for that

be very useful to a seafarer - or any traveller, for that Fig-4 Fig-5 matter -

Fig-4

Fig-5

matter - in situations where s/he has no access to prevalent methods of vision correction.

References:

http://www.myopia.org/conspiracy.

htm

http://www.osa-opn.org/Content/

ViewFile.aspx?id=10540

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pinhole_

glasses

http://www.biox.kth.se/research/

visualoptics/publications/The

Eye.PDF

visualoptics/publications/The Eye.PDF E-Learning for MEO Class IV Exams - preparatory course The
E-Learning for MEO Class IV Exams - preparatory course The Institute of Marine Engineers (India)
E-Learning for MEO Class IV Exams -
preparatory course
The Institute of Marine Engineers (India) aims to reduce the time that a maritime professionl spends away from his/her family
when preparing for competency exams. Towards that, IMEI is proud to announce that its is the first maritime institution in India
13. E Learning For MEO Class IV
to introduce e-learning preparatory course for ‘Certificate of Competency‘ examiniations. Teledata Marine Solutions Ltd, IMEI’s
Exams – preparatory course as per
partner in developing the e-learning course has a wealth of experience in developing Certificate of Competency (CoC), Academic
JUNE 2013
and Professional e-learning programs for a number of leading maritime education providers around the world.
MEO Class IV (Motor)
This is a e-preparatory program for Marine Engineering Officer Class IV Certificate of Competency (Motor) Examination
conducted by the Directorate General of Shipping, (DGS), Govt. of India. This program meets the requirements of The Director
General of Shipping (DGS) and the International Maritime Organization (IMO).
Teledata’s expertise in developing maritime e-learning programs combined with thorough reviews by maritime professionals
and educators at Teledata and IMEI means that the progarm is on par with the best in e-learning and also meets the reuirements of
DGS. This assists engineer officers to attain knowledge and competence to pass the examination conducted by the DGS.
The MEO class IV (Motor) program is divided into the following courses online.
• GEK – General Engineering Knowledge
MET – Marine Electro Technology
• MEK - Motor Engineering Knowledge
SCS – Ship Construction & Stability
• MEP - Marine Engineering Practices
Highlights
• SSEP – Ship Safety Environmental Protection
The program uses extensive animations, graphics, text and concept maps to enhance the interactive learning experience. The courses are
SCORM (Sharable Content Object Reference Module) which is an Interntional e-learning program development standard developed to
enhance e-learning experience. It also provides exam guide and tips, quiz, practice assessment, downloads and external learning links.
It lets the candidate to learn at their own pace and time from anywhere 24/7. The candidates additinally have access to e-coaching and
computer based self assessment.
On successful completion of the above e-learning program online, IMEI will issue a course completion certificated to the candidate/
engineer officer.
The entire course is available to students at Rs. 25,000/- ( Twenty five Thousand ) and if students desire, they can avail each subject by
paying Rs. 5000/- ( Five Thosand) as per their choice.
For joining the course and payment of fees , please Visit our website www.imare.in
For queries and further information, you may contact :
Honorary General Secreatry
Institute of Marine Engineers (India)
IMEI House, Sector 19, Plot No. 94, Nerul, Navi Mumbai, Pin 400706
Tel : +91 22 2770 1664/32676735 l Fax :+91 22 2771 1663 E mail : hgs@imare.in; adminstration@imare.in, Website: www.imare.in

34 Marine Engineers R eview (I ndia ) August 2013

www.imare.in

Technical

Groundings

Chris Adams BSc (Hons), MNI, MRIN Director, Steamship Insurance Management Services Limited, London

Synopsis This paper examines the incidence of ship groundings. These casualties appear to be occurring with increasing frequency and in circumstances which give rise to concern about the standards of voyage planning, vessel resource management and bridge watch-keeping notwithstanding the technological and training advances that have been made in recent years. The consequences of these casualties vary in severity. At one end of the spectrum the vessel may suffer little or no damage and be refloated with tug or salvage assistance. At the other, the vessel may suffer extensive physical damage resulting in the total loss of vessel and cargo, and environmental damage from the spillage of oil or other pollutants. Coastal authorities will almost invariably require the complete removal of the wreck no matter how difficult the technical challenges of such an operation may be. The costs of such operations, which are increasingly complex engineering projects, are very high. The liabilities associated with such incidents are generally covered by the Protection and Indemnity (P&I) Clubs and in the most serious cases are reinsured by the International Group’s (IG) pooling and excess loss reinsurance contract. Incidents of this type have been responsible for a large proportion of the escalation of claims covered by the Pool and Excess Loss reinsurance. It is also noteworthy that another significant proportion of the IG Pool and Excess Loss contract claims exposure is generated by vessel collisions or contacts with fixed objects whilst on passage. These incidents also highlight shortcomings in bridge watch-keeping and collision avoidance measures and involve causes which are closely connected with those that generate claims arising from grounding or wreck removal.

Introduction

The experience of Steamship Mutual is that in any underwriting year it is large claims in excess of US$250,000 that are responsible for year to year claims volatility. Typically around 99% of the number of claims incurred in any one year are for amounts less than US$250,000. However the contribution that those claims make to the overall annual claims exposure is proportionately much less – on average around 40-50% in a typical underwriting year without an exceptional experience of claims in excess of the IG Pool retention. In those years where there have been particularly costly Pool claims, that proportion has fallen to below 20%. It follows that approximately 1% of claims by number are responsible for a proportion of the annual claims exposure that is very many orders of magnitude greater.

Indicators of claims trends are to be found generally in the routine claims below $250,000, primarily because of the far greater number of claims and hence more representative sample that is involved. The occurrence of large claims in excess of that threshold is much

450.00

400.00

350.00

300.00

250.00

200.00

150.00

100.00

50.00

0.00

400.00 350.00 300.00 250.00 200.00 150.00 100.00 50.00 0.00 2004 2005 2006 2007 Gross Ultimate 2008

2004

2005

300.00 250.00 200.00 150.00 100.00 50.00 0.00 2004 2005 2006 2007 Gross Ultimate 2008 2009 2010

2006

2007

Gross Ultimate

2008

100.00 50.00 0.00 2004 2005 2006 2007 Gross Ultimate 2008 2009 2010 Net Ultimate 2011 Diagram

2009

2010

Net Ultimate

2011

Diagram 1 – Gross and Net Claims per Policy Year more random and is therefore the reason why year on year claims experience has peaks of volatility - see Diagram 1. The arrival of large claims has much in common with London buses. They can be conspicuous by their absence for a prolonged period, and then a number arrive in quick succession. However the frequency with

Policy

Aug – 12

Aug – 11

Aug – 10

Aug – 09

Aug – 08

Aug – 07

Aug – 06

Aug – 05

Aug-04

Aug-03

Year

2003

145.1

146.6

126.2

131.1

127.2

139

137.8

138.4

131.7

41.5

2004

298.1

292.5

290.4

291.5

289.3

293.6

279.4

258.6

43.6

2006

456.5

452.8

450.3

470

456.3

434.2

78.2

2008

117.6

110

111.4

124.5

23.5

2010

248.2

252.1

62.7

2012

153.9

Diagram 2 – International Group’s Pool Claim Experience 1

Technical

which incidents of grounding and other casualties that owe their cause to navigational errors are occurring raises the question of whether there is perhaps a trend to be identified in relation to these larger claims.

The financial impact of the large claims is considerable, as can be seen from the annual development profile of the claims upon the IG Pool – see Diagram 2. This table shows the value of the claims notified to the IG Pool at the six month point of each underwriting year since 2003. For example, for the 2003 underwriting year, six months into the year at 20th August 2003 claims totalling $41.5m had been notified to the Pool. Nine years later, at 20th August 2012, the value of those claims had grown to $145.1m. This development is entirely normal and reflects the development of the claims experience in the second half of the underwriting year and beyond.

The worst overall Pool claims experience hitherto has been in 2006 and 2007. In 2006 every Club in the IG experienced at least one Pool claim, and many Clubs had several. It can be seen from the development chart that for those two years, the first six months of each year accumulated $78.2m and $84.7m of claims.

By August 2012, those figures had grown to $456.5m and $404.4m respectively.

What is of greater concern is the comparison of the six month development figures for each year. It is apparent that for 2012, the six month total of $153.9m is very considerably higher than the equivalent figures for what are known to be the worst years yet for Pool claims in 2006 and 2007. This indicates a new high water mark in relation to the current year.

Grounding claims 2007 to 2011

Diagram 3 below shows the contribution made to the IG Pool Claims experience of casualties that arose from vessel groundings, collisions and contacts with fixed objects for which the underlying cause of the latter was a navigational error.

2007

Two major incidents in 2007 accounted for 26% of the value of the total claims experience for that year.

In April 2007 the cruise ship “Sea Diamond” grounded on the island of Santorini in Greece and subsequently sank, and in November 2007 the container ship “Cosco Busan” struck one of the pillars of the Oakland Bay Bridge whilst outbound from Oakland under pilotage.

Sea Diamond

On the afternoon of 5th April 2007 the “Sea Diamond”, with 1,195 passengers on board was approaching Santorini and navigating within the flooded caldera of this volcanic Greek island. As the ship closed the coastline she struck a well known and charted volcanic reef. The vessel’s shell plating was breached and she began taking on water. Fortunately all but two of the passengers and crew were evacuated safely before the vessel capsized and sank within the caldera. Santorini is a major tourist destination. Whilst undoubtedly somewhat subjective, it was named the world’s best island by the BBC in 2011. Consequently a sunken cruise ship and the environmental threats associated with that were deeply unwelcome. The topographical characteristics of a volcanic island involve very deep water within the caldera, and a

island involve very deep water within the caldera, and a 36 M arine E ngineers R

36 Marine Engineers R eview (I ndia ) August 2013

www.imare.in

Technical

very steeply shelving sea bottom, thus complicating operations to remove pollutants and/or wreckage.

Investigations into the cause of the casualty established that there was an error in the position shown on the chart of the rocks upon which the “Sea Diamond” grounded. Instead of being 57 metres from the shore as shown on the chart, the reef was actually located 131 metres from the shore. Further the chart indicated that there was 18-22 metres of water at the position where the ship grounded, whereas in fact the depth was less than 5 metres.

Charting inaccuracies do arise from time to time and this should be borne in mind when passage planning is undertaken. The “Sea Diamond” was a vessel of 21,484 GT, length 142.95m, beam 24.7m and draught 5.75m. One has to question how it came to be that the vessel was allowed to come to within less than a ship’s

length of the shore and what might have caused the bridge team to apparently consider that was appropriate. Did complacency have to part to play?

cosco Busan

The “Cosco Busan” incident has received much publicity. The casualty occurred on 7th November 2007 when the vessel was navigating within San Francisco Bay in dense fog. There were health issues involving the American pilot who was not effectively integrated with the ship’s Chinese Master and officers in the bridge team.

The pilot, who had very many years’ experience operating within San Francisco Bay, had his own passage plan and a particular technique for piloting the vessel through the designated span of

Policy

Number of

Percentage

Percentage

Number of

Percentage

Percentage

combined

Year

Groundings

by Number

By Value

COL/FFO 2

by Number

By Value

No.

% No.

% Value

2007

5

16%

11%

8

26%

40%

13

42%

51%

2008

7

37%

56%

4

21%

12%

11

58%

68%

2010

7

26%

24%

8

30%

37%

15

56%

61%

2012

4

31%

38%

1

8%

13%

5

21%

51%

Diagram 3 – IG Pool Claims Arising from Grounding and/or Navigational Error

1 Excluding Hydra’s 25% share at layer 1 of the General Excess of Loss Contract 2 Collision or contact with Fixed Object as the result of navigational error whilst on passage

Object as the result of navigational error whilst on passage M arine E ngineers R eview

Technical

the bridge. His practice was to set the radar Variable Range Marker (VRM) to one third of a nautical mile. Provided that the VRM on the radar display was “rolled around” the outline of Yerba Buena Island which was located at one end of the bridge span through which the ship was intending to pass, the vessel would transit at the centre of the span.

As can be seen from the image of the radar display in Diagram 4,

the VRM is displaced from the edge of Yerba Buena Island and ship

is clearly off-track. This would be apparent to anyone monitoring

the radar who was aware of the pilot’s passage plan. Unfortunately, the pilot was not monitoring the radar, and since he had failed to communicate his particular passage plan to the bridge team, none of them were aware of the significance of the displacement of the

VRM that is evident in Diagram 4. As a result the ship came into contact with the tower of the bridge and the impact ruptured two bunker tanks, spilling approximately 200 MT of bunker fuel in what is probably one of the most environmentally sensitive areas in the world. Whilst the impact caused significant damage to the bridge, the bulk of the liability exposure related to oil pollution damage.

The casualty was investigated by the National Transportation safety Board (NTSB) and further information can be found in the NTSB’s report 3 .

Given the dense fog that prevailed at the time, the Master would have been perfectly justified in deciding to delay the vessel’s

departure until visibility improved. That he apparently did not have the confidence to take that decision, perhaps erroneously placing undue weight on imagined commercial consequences is a concern.

A Master’s paramount obligation is the safety of his crew, the ship

and her cargo.

2008

Three of the grounding incidents in 2008 accounted for 44% of the overall Pool claims exposure for that year.

Fedra

The most serious incident was the grounding of the “Fedra” on Gibraltar’s Europa Point in October of that year resulting in considerable wreck removal liability. This was a spectacular and high profile grounding. The vessel was in ballast and dragged her anchor in heavy weather, eventually grounding directly beneath the Europa Point lighthouse. The force of the waves caused the vessel to break up.

The casualty was investigated by the Gibraltar Maritime Administration (GMA) which published a report 4 . The 36,886 GT bulk carrier “Fedra” had arrived at Gibraltar in ballast on 9th October 2008 with the intention of carrying out engine repairs. The vessel anchored about 2 miles to the east of Gibraltar. When the vessel arrived the weather was fair. However the weather forecast for the period up to noon UTC the following day was:

Variable 4 to 6, but northeast occasionally 8 in east, veering East 8 or 9 from East overnight. Severe gusts. Locally rough, becoming very rough. Thunderstorms.

The engine repairs that were necessary were to the cylinder liner of one of the units of the main engine. The Chief Engineer sought the Master’s permission to undertake this work immediately after finished with engines was rung on the vessel being brought to anchor. This permission was granted notwithstanding the forecast of easterly gales which would put the vessel two miles off a lee

shore. The nature of the repairs effectively meant that the vessel was disabled for the duration of the work. By 0600 the following morning the weather had deteriorated with easterly winds gusting 35-40 knots, and the vessel was beginning to roll heavily. The ship’s engineers resumed the repair work at 0700 but this was suspended shortly afterwards because the rolling of the vessel made the repair operations too dangerous. By 0640 the Master had determined that the anchor was dragging. By 0800 the vessel had dragged anchor into the one mile exclusion zone off Europa Point. This was noted by the Gibraltar Port

authorities monitoring the zone and the vessel was requested to shift her position further east. The Master acknowledged this communication affirmatively but did not notify the port that the vessel’s engine was disabled. Around half an hour later when the Master decided to ask the Port to despatch a tug, he merely advised that the vessel was not able to start the main engine.

Prior to the decision being taken to engage a tug, the Master telephoned the Company’s Operations Manager to discuss the issue. A tug called “Warrior” arrived and was eventually made fast but was not able to arrest the vessel’s drift towards the shore. Further tugs were despatched but following further conversations between the Company and the Master, instructions were given to actively resist taking a line from a larger and more powerful tug that had arrived, and to await the arrival of a smaller and less powerful tug “Med Fos” engaged by the Company. By

less powerful tug “Med Fos” engaged by the Company. By Diagram 4 – Cosco Busan radar

Diagram 4 – Cosco Busan radar display showing vessel off track

3 http://www.ntsb.gov/doclib/reports/2009/MAR0901.pdf

38 Marine Engineers R eview (I ndia ) August 2013

www.imare.in

Technical

noon, the vessel was less than four cables off Europa Point and throughout his communications with the tugs on the scene, the Master misrepresented the situation concerning the main engine by repeatedly inferring that the engineers were actively working to start the engine.

There were potentially four tugs available and in close proximity to provide assistance to the vessel. However, as the result of the Master’s telephone discussions with the Company the decision was taken to dispense with the services of two of these and to rely upon the “Warrior” and “Med Fos”. It ultimately proved impossible for the “Med Fos” to establish a connection. The “Warrior” had managed to hold the vessel for several hours but as attempts were being made the weigh the “Fedra’s” anchors to enable the tug to attempt to tow the ship clear of the coast, the “Warrior’s” tow line parted. Under the force of the weather, the vessel then drifted rapidly towards the shore and grounded at 1736.

The GMA investigation report found that the decision to repair the engine at anchor east of Gibraltar was taken on cost grounds. There were points in the Master’s telephone conversations with the Owners that made it clear that he was critical of that decision, but nonetheless he took the decision to permit the repairs to start in the face of a forecast of deteriorating weather. He also had the opportunity to require the engineers to continue working throughout the night rather than suspending work from midnight until 0700 with the objective of returning the engine to service before the weather conditions reached their worst.

Once the vessel began to drag her anchor the casualty could probably have been avoided if the true state of the vessel’s disablement had been disclosed to the port authorities and the masters of the tugs in attendance, and if the vessel had availed itself of the full extent of the towage services that were available. As it was, the effectiveness of the response to the vessel’s predicament was compromised by the apparent requirement of the Company to minimise cost.

The Master was an officer with considerable experience. He had been in command for 26 years. There are many points in the GMA report at which it is clear that the Master fully understood what the correct response should be and yet he chose to follow the

correct response should be and yet he chose to follow the 3 http://www.ntsb.gov/doclib/reports/2009/MAR0901.pdf 4

3 http://www.ntsb.gov/doclib/reports/2009/MAR0901.pdf

4 http://www.gibmaritime.com/search_results.php?searchString=fedra

M arine E ngineers R eview (I ndia ) August 2013 w

Technical

directions of the Company, thus compromising the response that ought to have been made pursuant to the overriding authority that the Master has concerning the safety of his ship and its crew. Why that should be the case can only be a matter for speculation. What is of the greatest concern is that this major casualty could so easily have been avoided.

2009

One of the grounding incidents and one collision in 2009 were particularly serious and those two incidents accounted for approximately 28% of the total exposure. Both involved extensive pollution liabilities.

Full city

On 31st July 2009 the bulk carrier “Full City” grounded at Sastein, off Langesund, Norway. The vessel had anchored at 1450 the previous day in a position about 9 cables from the nearest land. The ship was in ballast. At the time of anchoring the wind was from the southeast, near gale force. Later that evening the conditions deteriorated and the wind force increased. At 2351 the vessel began to drag her anchor.

Whilst the anchor was dragging, both flukes broke off from the shank. Despite starting the main engine, attempts to bring the vessel underway and to manoeuvre to safer water ==engine room became flooded. Bunker tanks were breached and there was extensive oil pollution.

The preliminary report issued by the Accident Investigation Board Norway (AIBN) records that the vessel anchored at Sastein on the instructions of Brevik VTS. The Master expected to receive further information from Brevik VTS relevant to the ship’s safety whilst at the anchorage. However, since that particular anchorage lies outside its area of responsibility Brevik VTS did not consider that it had any duty to provide any instructions. On 30th July the vessel had received a weather forecast for the Skagerrak region, which encompasses the anchorage, which contained a gale warning which predicted winds initially from the southeast of near gale force, increasing in the evening to southwest gale force 8, perhaps severe gale force 10 for a short duration. Notwithstanding that forecast it appears surprising that the Master should have accepted the risk of anchoring his vessel less than a mile off a lee shore in the anticipation of gale conditions.

Eagle Otome

This collision, in the Sabine- Neches Canal, Texas, involved the tanker “Eagle Otome” which collided with a berthed cargo vessel “Gull Arrow” and subsequently with a tank barge being towed by a tug “Dixie Vengeance”. As the result of the latter collision the cargo tank on the barge was breached and 462,000 gallons of oil were spilled. The Eagle Otome was being assisted by two local pilots. The NTSB concluded that the probable cause of the casualty was the failure of the first pilot, who had navigational control of the “Eagle Otome”, to correct the sheer that began as a result of the late initiation of a turn at a bend in the waterway. Contributing to the accident was the fatigue of the first pilot caused by his untreated obstructive sleep apnea and his work schedule, distraction caused by him unnecessarily taking a radio call that could have been handled by the second pilot, and a lack of effective bridge resource management. The pilot performance issues in this case bear some similarity with the “Cosco Busan” incident where the pilot’s requirement for medication arose from sleep apnea.

40 Marine Engineers R eview (I ndia ) August 2013

2010

Shen Neng 1

The most costly grounding incident in 2010 involved the bulk carrier “Shen Neng 1” which ran aground on Douglas Shoal on the Great Barrier Reef about 50 nm north of the port of Gladstone, Queensland on 3rd April 2010. The casualty is the subject of a report by the Australian Transportation Safety Board (ATSB). The ship had sailed from Gladstone earlier that day for Bayuquan, China laden with a full cargo of coal.

There are several passages through the Great Barrier Reef that can be followed on departure from Gladstone. One of these lies north of the Capricorn group of islands. The Shen Neng 1 had used this passage inbound to Gladstone and the outbound passage plan was based upon this route. The ship sailed from Gladstone at 1100 and at 1200 the second officer took over the navigational watch on the bridge. At this point the vessel was underway, heading due north.

The outbound route initially follows a course of 000T. The vessel’s passage plan plotted a waypoint to the SW of Douglas Shoal at which an alteration of course to starboard would be made to 075T. The second officer asked the master for permission to amend the passage plan in order to slightly reduce the passage distance by cutting the corner created by the originally plotted waypoint. In the context of the forthcoming passage to China the distance saved by this manoeuvre would have been de minimis as it amounted to about 2 nautical miles. A course alteration to 020T was made at 1530. Plotting that track beyond the point at which it intersected the next course line of 075T showed that this alteration put the ship on a heading directly towards the Douglas Shoal which was a short distance beyond the next course line. The revised waypoint associated with this amended passage plan was not programmed in to the vessel’s GPS system.

At 1600, after fixing the vessel’s position on the chart, the navigational watch was handed over to the chief officer. The second officer informed him of the change to the passage plan and that the coordinates of the revised waypoint were not in the GPS. From his examination of the chart, the chief officer thought the vessel would be at the revised 075T course alteration point at about 1700. He did not measure the distance to go and compare that with the vessel’s speed over the ground to determine an accurate ETA. He apparently felt very tired and positioned himself on the starboard side of the bridge where he had a clear view of the radar and from the bridge windows. At about 1630 the chief engineer came to the bridge. He checked the main engine rpm and the chief officer confirmed the ship’s speed as 12 knots. The chief engineer left the bridge at about 1635.

The chief officer had intended to fix the vessel’s position at 1630. As that time had passed during the chief engineer’s visit, he decided to wait until 1700. He read and recorded the latitude and longitude from the GPS at 1700. As he went to plot the position on the chart, he noted that ship’s speed had dropped to 8 knots and realised that the ship was closing on the shoal. Hand steering was engaged and just as this was accomplished the vessel’s speed was rapidly decreasing and the ship began to shudder. Starboard helm had no effect and the vessel ground to a halt on the reef.

The original passage plan had been programmed to the GPS system, and alarms were set to sound when the next waypoint was 2 cables distant, or if the ship was 3 cables off track. As the result of not programming the revised waypoint for the 075T course alteration

www.imare.in

Technical

in to the GPS, the defences provided by the alarms were rendered ineffective.

Fatigue of the chief officer also contributed to this casualty. He had 20 years of seagoing experience and had spent the last 3 years as chief officer. However, he had only joined the “Shen Neng 1” one month before the incident. It was his first call at Gladstone and the first time he had been in charge of loading the ship. He was not familiar with the operation and reliability of the ship’s de-ballasting system and to ensure that there were no delays in loading he had chosen to remain on duty for the majority of the time the ship was alongside. Consequently he had had less than 3 hours sleep in the 38 hours before the grounding.

There are requirements of the STCW Code and the ICS Bridge Procedures Guide which stipulate that the Officer of the Watch should not hand over the watch if there is any reason to believe that the relieving officer is unfit to discharge his duties effectively. Fatigue is one of the reasons for which an officer might be unfit for duty. The second officer was also involved in the cargo loading operation and had sufficient experience to understand the work demands that had been placed on the chief officer. In his answers to investigators he said that on reflection the chief officer did look tired on reaching the bridge, but he did not question him about his fitness for duty. Admittedly, this is not an easy issue particularly when an officer is being relieved by one of a more senior rank. However, social niceties pale into insignificance against safety considerations. Ultimately the Master should be called to decide upon an issue such as this.

The STCW Code also provides that prior to taking over a watch, relieving officers should satisfy themselves about the ship’s position, confirm its intended track, course and speed, and also

note any dangers to navigation expected to be encountered during their watch. The second officer should have been aware that the vessel was due to reach the alter course position at about 1642, but this was not communicated to the chief officer. He had assumed that the chief officer would reach that conclusion himself. He very probably could and would have done so but for the issues of fatigue and the distraction of the chief engineer’s visit to the bridge which resulted in him not plotting the ship’s position at 1630. Fatigue is the probable explanation for him not exercising greater care in determining the ship’s position as it approached the alter course position. A false sense of security may also have arisen from the fact that there were no surface points of reference for the navigational danger that lay ahead. The ship was in open sea.

2011

The contribution to the IG Pool claims experience for 2011 caused by incidents of grounding is striking. There were eight incidents, and all but one of them involving an estimated claims cost of more than US$10m. Two of those incidents are extremely well known by virtue of the extensive publicity they have received in the maritime press. They attracted that attention because of the cost associated with them as each is estimated to cost several hundreds of millions of US Dollars. Those two incidents involve the container ship “Rena”, and the cruise ship “Costa Concordia”.

Rena

The m.v. “Rena” was a 1990 built 3352 TEU capacity fully cellular container vessel. Her voyage commenced in Singapore on 5th September 2011 from where she sailed to Australia and New Zealand. On the morning of 4th October she sailed from Napier bound for Tauranga on New Zealand’s North Island. The outward pilot at Napier was disembarked at about 1020 and the Master

estimated that on the basis of the vessel making 17 knots, the ETA at Tauranga would be at 0230 the following morning.

At midnight the second officer took over the watch from the third officer. At that time the gyro heading of the vessel was about 272 degrees. During the watch hand- over discussions, the third officer reminded his relief that the passage plan required an alteration of course a few minutes later. Pursuant to that discussion, at about 0014 the vessel’s gyro heading was altered to 263 degrees. There was a difference of approximately +2 degrees between the vessel’s gyro heading and the ground track so that on a gyro heading of 265, the ship’s ground track was 263 degrees.

At 0015 Tauranga Harbour Control called the “Rena” to discuss the ETA and the pilot boarding time. The “Rena” gave the Harbour an ETA at the pilot station of 0300. The Harbour indicated that 0300 was at the end of the time window for pilotage and the told the “Rena” to make the best possible speed for the pilot station.

to make the best possible speed for the pilot station. Source and with acknowledgements to the

Source and with acknowledgements to the Accident Investigation Board Norway Diagram 5 – The movement of “Full City” before grounding

Technical

Diagram 6 shows the intended passage plan for the approach to Tauranga which involved an alteration of course towards the pilot station at a waypoint approximately 2 nm north of Astrolabe Reef. It can be seen that at 0120, the plotted position placed the vessel slightly to the south of the passage plan course line marked on the chart.

Between 0120 and 0150 the ship’s course was progressively altered to port such that by 0150 the Rena was on a gyro heading of about 255 degrees, a ground track therefore of 253 degrees.

The Master had placed a mark on the chart with instructions that he should be called when the vessel reached that point. That occurred at around 0135 and the second officer called the master at that point. During their conversation the second officer confirmed the ETA at the pilot station and also discussed an alteration of course to shorten the distance to go to which the Master agreed. It appears from the record of course alterations that the second officer had already begun to implement that plan prior to his discussion with the Master.

The plan was to navigate closer to the Astrolable Reef and a position was marked on the chart about 1 nm north of the reef. However, as can be seen from the GPS track of the vessel in Diagram 6, the vessel’s course over the ground was taking her directly towards the reef.

GPS positions were plotted on the chart at 0120 and 0142. The practice during the second officer’s watch was for the GPS position to be recorded and plotted by the AB seaman lookout, and then checked by the second officer. At 0142 the second officer had also set-up on one of the radars a parallel index on the northern tip of Motiti Island.

The Master arrived on the bridge at 0152 and they had a discussion over the radar picture, after which the next waypoint that the GPS was set to monitor was changed from that north of Astrolabe Reef to that over the pilot station. At 0158 the Master removed the parallel index lines from the radar because he felt they were cluttering the screen. Shortly afterwards, and for several minutes, he and the second officer were in the chartroom discussing arrival arrangements at Tauranga. Whilst the AB seaman recorded a GPS position at 0200, because he did not want to disturb the Master and second officer, the position was not marked on the chart. As can be seen from the diagram there was an error either in the reading or plotting of that position since when it was put on the chart after the casualty, it placed the vessel further north than her actual position at that time.

At 0205 the master noted an intermittent radar echo about 2.5nm right ahead of the “Rena” He and the lookout tried to locate the echo with binoculars from the bridge windows and later from the bridge wing but could see nothing. The Master decided to plot the ship’s position and he began to make his way to the chartroom. As he was doing so the “Rena” struck the Astrolabe Reef at a speed of around 17 knots at about 0214.

Bunker tanks were ruptured and there was extensive pollution. Containers and their contents were lost overboard and in the heavy weather that followed the ship eventually broke its back. An extremely difficult, time-consuming and costly operation has followed to remove the pollutants, containers, cargo, and the wreck of the ship itself. The complexity of the operation is exacerbated by the underwater topography of the grounding site, the status of

the reef as a sacred place to the indigenous population, and the high energy environment in which the wreck is located.

There are similarities of this incident with the grounding of the “Shen Neng 1” in that there was a deviation from the passage plan with the objective of saving time and distance. Had the vessel’s position been rigorously established and monitored to ensure that its track did not have the vessel running into danger, particularly when the final waypoint was fed into the GPS, this catastrophic casualty could so easily have been avoided. The Master gained his master’s certificate of competence in December 2007. He was given his first command of a container ship one month later in January 2008. He spent two and half months in command of the “Rena” between November 2010 and February 2011, then rejoined the vessel as Master in March until the date of the casualty six and a half months later. The second officer gained his certificate of competence in September 2010 and had been on the “Rena” since November 2010.It is a well known feature of current crewing arrangements that the collective experience of a ship’s complement of officers is now far less than was historically the case.

costa concordia

On the night of 13th January 2012 the cruise ship “Costa Concordia” struck a rock off the island of Giglio off the Italian coast with consequences that have been well publicised. From a P&I claims perspective the incident has given rise to the largest claim to date on the IG Pool and its Excess Loss reinsurance contract.

The “Costa Concordia” had departed Civitavecchia at 1900 bound for Savona with 4,229 passengers and 1,023 crew onboard. Prior to departure there was the intention to pass close by the island of Giglio on a “touristic sailing course” along the 10m sounding contour. The vessel’s course on departing Civitavecchia was 302T. After about an hour and forty five minutes, the vessel altered course to 278T to head towards Giglio. When the vessel was in a position just under 1 nm from Giglio a further course alteration to 334T true was to be made to bring the ship on to a track parallel to the coast of Giglio about 0.5nm to seaward of the 10m depth contour.

At about 2116 the Master arrived on the bridge and took over the con of the vessel from the chief officer. At 2137 the ship was about 1.8 nm off Giglio and the turn to starboard was commenced with vessel proceeding at a speed of 15.4 knots. At 2144 the manoeuvre was still continuing. However, ships do not turn as if on rails, and as can be seen from Diagram 7, the effect of this manoeuvre, undertaken at speed, was to displace the vessel much further to the south west of the intended 334T track line on the chart and therefore much closer to the coast and on a track headed directly towards the rocks at Le Scole Reef. When it became apparent that the ship was running into danger, the helm was ordered hard to starboard to successfully clear the bow, and then hard to port in an unsuccessful attempt to clear the vessel’s stern. At about 2145 the port side of the ship struck the eastern edge of the reef. The hull was breached flooding several compartments.

After the impact the vessel headed north with considerably less way and was turning slowly to starboard. She eventually grounded just north of the port of Giglio on a heading almost reciprocal to that she was following at the time of the initial impact which caused the loss of the vessel.

Technical

Of itself, the wisdom of passing a small island at a distance of less than a mile at night in a 114,147GT cruise ship with over 5,250 persons onboard has to be questionable. Doing so with the vessel on a steady course at the requisite passing distance off the coast

is one thing. Approaching the island at speed and then seeking to

turn the ship through 55 degrees when less than two nautical miles off is quite another thing altogether. It seems hardly surprising that the manoeuvre was hazardous in the extreme as subsequent events amply revealed. No matter who well designed or constructed a ship

might be, the flooding of more compartments than the vessel is designed to withstand will inevitably lead to the ship foundering.

Other Incidents

Apart from the serious casualties referred to above there have been

a number of other incidents of grounding that have fortunately

not resulted in liabilities of great magnitude. However the circumstances of those casualties suggest that all is not necessarily well with standards of shipboard operation, bridge watchkeeping and navigational procedure.

On 15th February 2011 the container vessel “K-Wave” ran aground about 13 miles east of Malaga in Spain. She had departed Algeciras on the evening of 14th February bound for Valencia. She was making good a course of around 80 degrees true. At midnight the third officer who had just attained his 22nd birthday was relieved by the second officer. Thereafter a number of the other officers arrived on the bridge for an impromptu party to celebrate the third officer’s birthday, and an undetermined quantity of alcohol was consumed. At 0200 the second officer asked everyone to leave the bridge and the party broke up. At 0216 an alteration of course was made from 080T to 305T, an alteration of 135 degrees to port that

turned the vessel towards the coast. No alarms sounded when this course alteration was made and the VDR revealed total silence from the wheelhouse. At 0546 the vessel ran aground on a gently shelving sandy shore. The chief officer came to the bridge 20 minutes later to find the bridge unmanned, the vessel hard aground, and the main engine running with the controllable pitch propeller set at full ahead. No lookout had been posted and the Bridge Navigational Watch Alarm System (BNWAS) had been turned off. The consequences of the unnoticed course alteration towards the coast, and the absence of a watchkeeper could have been far more serious and it is entirely fortuitous that more catastrophic consequences were avoided.

On 20th June 2011 the 6,435 TEU capacity container ship Al Rawdah ran aground on a reef off Batam Island in the Singapore Straits after sailing from Port Klang. According to the Singapore Maritime & Port Authority the ship ignored repeated warnings that the vessel was standing in to danger and recommendations to alter course. This incident bears similarities to the grounding of the 6,188 TEU capacity Maersk Kendal on the Monggok Sebarok reef in the Singapore Strait on 16th September 2009. The Maersk Kendal had made a course alteration to starboard to give way to vessels that were crossing her track from her starboard side. The course alteration placed her on a track towards the reef. Despite warnings from Singapore Vessel Traffic Information System (VTIS) the Maersk Kendal did not reduce speed or alter course in time to avoid the grounding.

On 3rd August 2011 the 803 TEU capacity container vessel “Karin Schepers” ran aground on the Cornish coast whilst on passage from Cork in Ireland to Rotterdam. The vessel had sailed from Cork at

in Ireland to Rotterdam. The vessel had sailed from Cork at Source and with acknowledgements to

Source and with acknowledgements to The Transport Accident Investigations Commission, New Zealand Diagram 6 – The track of the “Rena” approaching Tauranga

Technical

2115 on 2nd August. The initial course from Cork towards Lands

End in Cornwall was broadly south-easterly and set the vessel on

a course towards the entrance of the southbound lane of the North-

South traffic separation system off Lands End.

The Master, a Ukrainian who had sailed as master for 8 years, held the 8-12 watch. At midnight he was relieved by the second officer, a Filipino national who had joined the ship in May and was making his first trip as second officer. The Master returned to the bridge some twenty minutes later. During the next two hours the Master repeatedly left and returned to the bridge sounding increasingly intoxicated as time progressed. At 0323 the Master ordered the second officer to leave the bridge and he duly complied despite expressing the view that the Master was drunk. The Master then fell asleep and with no lookout posted, and the BNWAS having been de-activated, the vessel missed the alter course position. Instead of turning to a southerly course into the southbound lane of the TSS, she continued on her southeasterly course until she grounded on the Cornish coast near the Pendeen lighthouse. This casualty highlighted a previous incident in March 2009 when the same ship ran aground on the Danish coast. That incident was investigated by the Danish Maritime Authority which found that the grounding was caused by the chief officer falling asleep during his watch as the result of being incapacitated by intoxication. Further there was no lookout on the bridge and the BNWAS was turned off. In response to that investigation the DMA was informed that the owners had introduced various measures including a zero alcohol policy.

On 8th November 2011 the 1,849 TEU capacity Turkish container ship “Cafer Dede” ran aground on the Greek Island of Syros whilst

in the course of a laden voyage from Turkey to Italy. Images of the casualty that can be seen from the web show the vessel head on to the rocky coastline somewhat reminiscent of the picture presented by the container vessel “Alva Star” which ran into the island of Zakinthos head on in November

2006 8 . There is no report in the

public domain to explain the cause of either of these groundings. From the photographs that exist, they look unusual in the extreme.

More recently, on 15th February

2012 the fast ferry “Maverick Dos”

ran spectacularly aground whilst on passage from Ibiza to Formentera in the

Balearic Islands, Spain. Images show this small vessel high and dry upon a

small rocky island as if placed there by

a giant hand. On 12th December 2012 a

small multipurpose vessel “Beaumont” ran aground near Gijon in Spain whilst on passage from La Coruna to Aviles. Coastal authorities had attempted to warn the vessel that she was heading for the rocks but reportedly received no response.

Summary

There are of course many other incidents, and those outlined in this paper are but a small selection of those that have given rise to very

substantial liabilities, and/or which have occurred in circumstances which should be a cause for major concern. There are of course groundings that have occurred as the result of ships being overwhelmed by natural forces. Some of the incidents that arose as the result of the tsunami following the earthquake off Sendai, Japan in 2011 are cases in point. There have also been groundings that have occurred as the result of other extreme weather conditions such as hurricanes, cyclones and typhoons. The risk of such casualties will always be present and seems likely to increase as the result of the increasingly more frequent adverse weather conditions that are experienced worldwide.

However, it is also apparent that groundings are persistently occurring as the result of avoidable human error on the part of the navigational team. The causes of these errors are varied, but there are recurrent features such as fatigue – with or without the added complication of alcohol consumption, complacency, deviation from passage plans, poor risk assessment, and poor bridge resource management. The navigational equipment on vessels is increasingly sophisticated. The amount of information that is available to the navigator is also increasing. Yet notwithstanding the abundance of information that is available from a wide array of equipment and navigational systems, groundings continue to occur in circumstances which challenge credulity. It is particularly noteworthy that those incidents which have given rise to the largest P&I claims could all so easily have been avoided.

When groundings occur which have severe consequences, such as pollution and where the ship is so extensively damaged that the wreck has to be removed, the costs escalate dramatically. Technological advances are such that it is now possible to remove wreckage from physical locations in which, not so long ago, something less comprehensive may have been acceptable to the authority ordering remedial action in relation to a wreck. In the

ordering remedial action in relation to a wreck. In the Source and with acknowledgements to MIT

Source and with acknowledgements to MIT – the Italian Ministry of Infrastructure and Transport Diagram 7 – the Costa Concordia’s Turning Manoeuvre off Giglio

44 Marine Engineers R eview (I ndia ) August 2013

www.imare.in

Technical

current era, the idea of partial wreck removal only to the extent necessary to remove any threat to navigation is far less palatable to coastal authorities than it may have been historically, and this has a very direct cost implication. If it is possible to completely remove a wreck, even though the cost might be extremely high, it can be difficult to successfully oppose that. Further, the method of removal might also be dictated by local authorities who might oppose cutting a wreck into sections because of environmental concerns, and insist upon removing the vessel intact with obvious adverse cost implications for the P&I insurers.

Consequently in the face of extremely high P&I liability cost arising from a grounding it is imperative that the utmost is done to avoid these casualties occurring. As previously mentioned standards of equipment are increasingly high and standards of training have also improved. The ISM Code also introduced increased standards of safety awareness and management. However notwithstanding these developments, incidents of the type outlined in this paper continue to occur. Ship owners and operators should be extremely concerned to ensure that the substantial assets they have entrusted to their seagoing staff are being operated safely and fully in accordance with the company’s safety management system. This in turn requires their superintendents to rigorously check the manner in which vessels under their supervision are being operated and particularly navigated. Safety is paramount and if the crew are fatigued after a particularly long or difficult operation to load or discharge cargo the Master has the authority to delay the vessel’s departure to allow his crew time to rest and recuperate in order to ensure that they are fit to handle the voyage ahead of them. This is particularly the case if the immediate passage on departure is likely to be challenging because of threats posed by weather or navigational hazards. Whilst it is appreciated that delay is costly and therefore undesirable from that perspective, avoiding that delay and sailing the ship with a crew that is fatigued can be a very false economy as some of the groundings outlined above amply demonstrate.

There are numerous factors at play which very probably also contribute to the causes of these incidents. The growth of the world shipping fleet in recent years has put pressure on the availability of crew, and this in turn has had an impact upon the collective experience of those onboard particular ships. Training and qualifications are only part of the solution to sound ship operation. Experience is another very important factor and that of course takes time to achieve. In an era of rapid growth, the experience of the crew that are globally available is inevitably diminished.

There are also problems caused by the prevalence of mixed nationality crews, and the cultural differences that arise. For the ISM Code to work effectively there has to be encouragement, led from the top at sea and reinforced by shore management, for junior officers to question and challenge situations that they perceive to be wrong. This can be difficult enough where the crew is of a single nationality because of the inherent reluctance to question, and thereby implicitly criticise, the actions or decisions of those more senior in rank.

That social barrier can be significantly hardened when the mix of nationalities is such that those of a junior rank are culturally

is such that those of a junior rank are culturally attuned to defer to those who

attuned to defer to those who are their seniors in age, rank and experience. More needs to be done to develop working practice, particularly within the bridge management team, to ensure that it works effectively. The bridge team needs to fully understand the passage plan, frequently monitor the ship’s position as the passage progresses, and ensure that threats to navigational safety are detected and responded to at the earliest opportunity.

There is no room for complacency because the cost implications of vessel groundings can be so serious. The more that can be done to raise awareness of the risks and causes of groundings in an effort to prevent further unnecessary loss occurring can only be beneficial.

Introduction to Author

Chris Adams served at sea as a navigating officer with Ellerman City Liners of London. After obtaining a B.Sc. (Hons) degree in Nautical Studies from the University of Southampton in 1977 he came ashore to pursue a career in marine insurance, joining The Steamship Mutual Underwriting Association Ltd., London in 1979 as a Claims Executive. He is currently a Director of Steamship Insurance Management Services Limited, the London Representatives of the Managers of The Steamship Mutual Underwriting Association (Bermuda) Ltd., a major P&I Club within the International Group, where he has responsibilities as

Head of the European Syndicate, and Head of Loss Prevention.

Head of the European Syndicate, and Head of Loss Prevention. 7 http://www.denizgazete.com/haber/27405- 8
46 M arine E ngineers R eview (I ndia ) August 2013 w w w

46 Marine Engineers R eview (I ndia ) August 2013

www.imare.in

Student

Installation Of Energy Saving Devices For The Improvement Of Propulsion Efficiency

Mangala Deoghare & Abbas Daruwala Tolani Maritime Institute

ABSTRAcT

Ever since sail gave way to mechanical power as the prime method of propulsion, shipping has accounted for a substantial quantity of the world’s oil consumption which today amounts to about 3.3% but any increase in the efficiency of the propulsion system can lead to huge savings. The propeller of the ship provides the thrust required to move it and simultaneously has certain losses associated with it. A propeller in open water has a uniform inflow of water into it but the scenario is quite different when placed behind a ship. The flow field is changed by

the ship’s hull. Due to viscosity the ship’s hull drags the adjacent water with it and this effect increases with distance to such an effect that water at the stern has a forward velocity. This