1.1 The basis for decision making in emergency
situations on board modern high-tech passenger ships today consists
of some situation monitoring potential and a number of manuals for
use in case of emergencies, such as collisions, groundings, capsizing/sinking
1.2 The monitoring functionalities are limited
and the digital non-standardized instrument displays situated on the
navigating bridge makes it difficult to detect critical trends.
1.3 The decision maker on the navigating bridge
today has to consult and retrieve information from several emergency
procedures and contingency plans with different layouts depending
on the type of emergency, as the emergency is developing. The current
retrieval of information is often time consuming and the sometimes
irrational distribution of instrument displays on the navigating bridge
tends to add to the confusion during emergencies.
2.1 In order to improved the basis for rapid decision-making
in emergency situations, it is recommended that the following functions
are implemented on board the ship:
The requirements for each of the two systems are specified
Integrated Monitoring System
3.1 It is recommended that a computer-based monitoring
system with a graphical interface is provided on the navigating bridge.
3.2 The system should be able to present time
series and alarm levels of sensor signals. If a critical trend is
detected or the alarm level is exceeded, the system should alert the
master/officer of the watch by audible alarms, and a visual indication
of the sensor signal in question should be provided. The timing aspect
is crucial and the early warning provided by the monitoring system
will, in most emergency scenarios, significantly limit the consequences.
3.3 The following sensor signals should be monitored,
.1 draught, trim and heel (low pass filtered signals
should be derived in order to facilitate trend detection);
.2 liquid/water level indicators in all compartments
below the main deck;
.3 water level indications in all compartments
on the main deck at positions, where water might be trapped in case
of flooding (e.g. space between bow door and inner ramp, corners of
a subdivided ro-ro cargo space etc.);
.4 status of all watertight and fire doors;
.5 status of bow doors and any other shell doors;
.6 status of shell door locking devices;
.7 stress levels in bow door locking devices;
.8 temperature and smoke concentrations in all
.9 status of all control devices or emergency
management (pumps, valves, doors, ventilators and dampers); and
.10 water depth.
3.4 Alarm modes for status of bow door locking
devices should be integrated with propeller RPMs (or a similar “at
sea indicator”) such that the master is alerted if locking devices
are not locked when the ship is at sea.
Decision Support System for Emergency
4.1 A co-ordinated decision support system for
emergency management should be provided on the bridge.
4.2 The system should, as a minimum, be based
on user friendly paper-based emergency plans.footnote Emergency shipboard situations shall be
identified within, but not limited to, the following main groups of
emergency shipboard situations:
.2 damage to ship;
.4 acts threatening the safety of the ship and
the security of its passengers and crew;
.5 personnel accidents;
.6 cargo-related accidents; and
.7 emergency assistance to other ships.
4.3 The emergency procedures should also provide
decision support for handling any combined situation.
4.4 Emergency procedure manuals should have a
common appearance and be easy to use. The emergency procedures should
cover all likely emergency scenarios. For the damage control procedures,
it should be required that procedures use the actual loading condition
as calculated for the ship's voyage stability.
4.5 The administration may accept the use of a
computer-based decision support system which would comprise all the
information in the paper manuals, procedures, check lists, etc. on
the navigating bridge and be able to present a list of recommended
actions to be carried out in case of emergencies.