quote:
Study uncovers hazards in anti-collision system
By PETER STALBERG
January 2, 2006THE widespread adoption of new collision avoidance technology has had no discernable effect on the high incidence of collisions at sea, according to a new study.
Following the study of major collisions, mutual marine insurer The Swedish Club now warns that the new technology can promote over-confidence and complacency.
With the introduction of technology such as AIS (Automatic Identification Systems) and GPS together with Automatic Radar Plotting Aid and possibly also electronic charts, bridge teams have the full picture of all vessels in their vicinity, including track and speed data.
Yet, too many collisions still occur and we need to understand why. One issue already identified is the concentration of vessels on the 'optimum track' as indicated by the GPS, but there are also other factors at work.
New phenomenon
It will require further study of a larger ship population to prove the point beyond contention, but we already have evidence that the new technology presents new hazards. There is nothing wrong with the equipment.
AIS, for example, is an excellent tool. It seems, however, that having the full picture may tempt the bridge team to take greater risks when avoiding potential collisions.
There is a temptation to accept narrow margins which leave no room for error. There is then the danger that vessels in close proximity fail to manoeuvre as expected. We are moving from the well-documented problem of 'radar-assisted collisions' to a new phenomenon: deviation from correct procedures simply because an electronic display suggests that a manoeuvre should be safe.
Safety margins exist to accommodate the possibility of error or misunderstanding. People need to be fully aware that 'having the full picture' is not a licence for dispensing with the International Collision Regulations and the fundamentals of good seamanship.
Human factor
The Club's latest study assessed Hull & Machinery (H&M) claims costing over US$2 million in the February 2004-July 2005 period. This adds to the data of an earlier study of collisions over the three years to January 2004. During the 18 months reviewed, collisions accounted for six of the 15 of H&M claims in this category. All six collisions occurred during the night hours or in poor visibility, but in calm sea conditions.
Furthermore, five of the six occurred in the China/Taiwan/Singapore region. In 2004, collisions represented 15 per cent of the Club's H&M claims yet accounted for 55 per cent of total H&M claims costs. The latter proportion represents a doubling in just five years.
Five of the six major collisions studied in the 18 months to July this year were the consequence of human factors such as lack of situational awareness and failure to adhere to rules and correct procedures. In two of the six collisions, AIS was in use as a navigational aid. In one instance, the wrong ship was contacted at a critical moment. In the other, the AIS was not functioning correctly.
In many ways, AIS is the last piece in the collision avoidance technological jigsaw. We are now left with the 'software' - the human component. No matter how advanced the bridge equipment outfit, there can be no compromise on strict adherence to correct collision avoidance procedures which provide for appropriate safety margins. Close passing is always dangerous, with or without the new technology!
Training
Safe navigation in busy waters is demanding and requires intense concentration. Given the pressures of modern ship operation there are no grounds whatsoever for adopting a collision avoidance strategy with low safety margins.
This offers no immunity against human error or the possibility that other vessels will not behave as expected.
The Club is to redouble its efforts to raise awareness of such problems. We remain committed to developing the Club's Maritime Resource Management (MRM) training programme, now delivered on a global basis.
MRM focuses on patterns of human behaviour which make for safe operation and the avoidance of errors and unacceptable risk-taking.
Proactive
It is clear, however, that we need to do more to reduce the incidence of collisions. As a mutual association, we have an obligation to be proactive in this area. Apart from damage to property, lives and the environment are also at risk.
The writer is director, technical and loss prevention at The Swedish Club. This article first appeared in the Swedish Club Letter