1. SAFETY CONSEQUENCES OF CREW INNOVATION ONBOARD SHORTSEA SHIPS
Veiligheid aan boord van shortsea schepen als gevolg van een nieuwe manier van werken
SAFETY CONSEQUENCES OF CREW INNOVATION ONBOARD SHORTSEA SHIPS
Wilfried Post en Anja Langefeld
&

2. Problem: a growing shortage of officers
Source: BIMCO/ISF

3. Research question
“Is sailing with a Maritime Officer at least as safe as with a Chief Engineer?”
for shortsea shipping within Europa (+ EEZ)
for kW ships running on MGO/MDO
with an unmanned machine room
and 24/7 technical shore support available

4. Watch schedules 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Maritime
Officer
Chief
Mate
Master
Innovative watch schedule: Marof replaces Chief Engineer
Engineer 12 11 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13
Conventional watch schedule
Navigation
Engineering
Cumulated working hours

5. Approach
Aanpak

6. Data collection Situational and technical circumstances Workloadx (
Situational and technical circumstances
Interviews
(after incidents
or important
changes)
Questionnaires
(after each
sailing period)
Log book
Continuous
(every shift and/or
every hour)
(every journey)
Workload
Tiredness
Efficiency
Knowledge
Skills
Work/rest hours
Labour satisfaction

7. Approach
Aanpak

8. Two types of crew concepts
A comparative study
Two types of crew concepts
Traditional ships:
ships with a Chief Engineer
Marof ships: ships with a Maritime Officer & 24/7 shore support

9. Participating ships
MS Adamas
MS Alana Evita
MS Albertus F
MV Ashley
MV Christina
MV Derk
MS Eems Dollard
MS Eems Sprinter
MV Flinterbaltica
MV Flinterbelt
MV Flinterbirka
MV Flinterbothnia
MV Flinterbright
MV Kelt
MV Lelie
MV Marinda
MS Novatrans
MV Panda
MV Panta Rhei
MS Rhodanus
MS Rimini

10. Participating ships Operators Total Journeys Amasus Flinter Wagenborg
Traditional (TS) 3 9
177
Marof (MS) 1 2 7 10
134 4 5 19
311

11. Participating Officers
Condition
Master
Chief
Mate
Engineer
Marof
Total
Traditional (TS) 28 36 20 - 84
Marof (MS) 23 37 88 51 64
172

13. Approach
Aanpak

14. Number of shifts and hours
Master
Chief
Mate
Chief Engineer
Marof /
Engineer
Total
Shifts
5940
4784
1996
869
2638
16227 TS
3776
3510 -
9282 MS
2164
1274
6946
Hours
28119
19662
9911
57692
18896
15628
34524
9223
4034
23168

15. Navigation Voyage phases

16. Navigation Workload Extreme busy Considerably busy Rather busy
A little busy
Hardly busy
Not busy at all

17. Navigation Tiredness Extreme tired Considerably tired Rather tired
A little tired
Hardly tired
Not tired at all

18. Navigation How many hours did you sleep?TS
Master MS
Master TS
Chief Mate MS
Chief Mate

19. Team Support Traditional Ship
Underway
Team Support Traditional Ship
Arrival/departure
Moored
Anchored

20. Team Support Marof Ship
Underway
Team Support Marof Ship
Arrival/departure
Moored
Anchored

21. Engineering Workload Chief Engineer Marof Extreme busy
Considerably busy
Rather busy
A little busy
Hardly busy
Not busy at all

22. Engineering Tiredness
Chief Engineer
Marof
Extreme tired
Considerably tired
Rather tired
A little tired
Hardly tired
Not tired at all

23. Engineering How many hours did you sleep?
Chief
Engineer
Marof

24. Shore Support How often needed and how satisfied?
15% versus 28%
of the voyages
3,7% versus 6,8%
of the shifts TS
Master MS
Master
Chief
Engineer
Marof

25. Approach
Aanpak

26. Journey assessment How well did the voyage go?TS
Master MS
Master

27. Journey assessment How safe was the voyage?TS
Master MS
Master

28. Navigation How well did your watch go?TS
Master MS
Master TS
Ch Mate MS
Ch Mate
Marof

29. Safety Critical situations
Traditional ship
Marof ship
Total
Master
Chief
Mate
Marof
# Watch hours
18896
15628
9223
3782
9911
57440
# Critical
situations
125 79 54 18 61
337
Incidence
(per 1000 hrs)
6.62
5.06
5.85
4.76
6.15
5.87

30. Safety Critical situations
Traditional ship
Marof ship
Total
# Watch hours
34524
22916
57440 #
Incidence
Critical Situations
204
5.91
133
5.80
337
5.87
Bad weather (23%) 29
0,84 36
1,57 65
1,13
Navigational (49%) 87
2,52 49
2,14
136
2,37
Technical (15%) 22
0,64 21
0,92 43
0,75
Personnel (8%) 12
0,35 10
0,44
0,38
Cargo (4%) 9
0,26 3
0,13
0,21

31. Realised maintenance How well did your watch go?
Chief
Engineer
Marof

32. Realized maintenance How well could you keep up with your planned work?
Chief
Engineer
Marof

33. Technical functioning Alarm handling
Chief
Engineer
Marof

34. Conclusions

35. Conclusions (1) Safe Sailing
No severe incident in, converted, 6,5 year
337 critical situations in almost watch hours
overall no significant difference between crew types
43 technical problems; no significant difference
136 navigational problems; no significant difference
No significant difference in experienced safety

36. Conclusions (2) Workload and tiredness during navigation
No significant difference has been found in workload between navigators of both crew types
Masters of Marof ships are significant less tired compared to Masters of traditional ships
Crews of Marof ships sleep significant more often ‘6 hours or more’ compared to crews of traditional ships
Crews of Marof ships judge their watch significant more often as ‘good’ to ‘very good’

37. Conclusions (3) Technical maintenance and functioning
Chief Engineers sleep significant more often ‘6 hour or more’ and much more regular compared to Marofs
Marofs and Chief Engineers are equally busy but Marofs rapport significant less tiredness
Marofs judge their maintenance shifts significant more often as ‘good’ to ‘very good’
There were no signs that Marof ships functioned less well compared to traditional ships

38. Conclusions (4) Shore Support
Both Marof ships and traditional ships make use of Shore Support; Marof ships significant more often
Many problems can’t be solved without Shore Support

39. Conclusions (5) Work satisfaction
Officers on Marof ships are significant more satisfied about their watch
Masters and Chief Mates on Marof ships sleep significant more often ‘6 hours or more’
Officers on Marof ships are less tired

40. Summary
Shortsea ships sail with a Marof at least as safe as with a Chief Engineer
There are no indications that ships sailing with the innovative crew composition function technically less
Officers of the innovative crew composition are more satisfied with their watch
Officers of the innovative crew composition are less tired, which contributes to the prevention of fatigue

42. Participating Ship requirements
The ship was no passenger of tanker ship.
The ship’s gross tonnage was less than 3000 GT.
The ship was operated in the shortsea shipping within the European waters (including 200 nm Exclusive Economic Zone).
The ship’s propulsion power was between 749kW and 3000kW.
The auxiliary machinery was not complex.
The engine room was of the periodically unattended machinery space arrangement in accordance with the rules of a classification society.
The ship was running on MGO/MDO, as described by ISO 8217:2005.
The propulsion as well as the steering power were to be maintained or immediately restored in case of a blackout.