Advertisement

WMU Journal of Maritime Affairs

, Volume 9, Issue 2, pp 137–151 | Cite as

Evacuation in practice — Observations from five full scale exercises

  • Monica Lundh
  • Margareta Lützhöft
  • Leif Rydstedt
  • Joakim Dahlman
Article

Abstract

Evacuating a ship is a difficult task which normally is performed under severe and demanding conditions, exposing both crew members and passengers on board to an extreme and demanding situation. To be prepared for an incident happening on board and shouldering this responsibility is part of the everyday reality of the crew members’ work situation. This study reports the results from observations made on board five passenger ships performing full scale exercises with participants acting as passengers. The results pointed out four problem areas; the safety organization, the ability to perform tasks, the handling of life vests and communication. These areas represented an uncertainty in the requirements associated with the crew members’ role in the safety organization implied. There was also evidence of difficulties in the crews’ performing of different tasks, problems with donning life vests and insufficient communication. The crew member groups on board differ in their skills and knowledge to handle an evacuation situation. These groups need to be studied separately and systematically in order to determine how they comprehend their work situation and what their needs of preparation and training are in order to feel content with meeting the demands of their role in the safety organization.

Key words

Communication Evacuation Field Trials Passenger Ships Safety Organization IMO 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Andersson, M. 2005. Human aspects on the evacuation of passenger ships — Passengers’ and crews’ capabilities and limitations to cope with a dangerous and demanding situation. Lic. thesis, Department of Shipping and Marine Technology, Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg.Google Scholar
  2. Chertkoff, J.M., and R.H. Kushigian. 1999.Don’t panic: The psychology of emergency egress and ingress. Westport,CT: Prager Publishers.Google Scholar
  3. Deere, S., E. Galea, P. Lawrence, L. Filippidis, and S. Gwynne. 2006. The impact of the passenger response time distribution on ship evacuation performance. Transactions of the Royal Institution of Naval Architects Part A:International Journal of Maritime Engineering 148 (1): 35–44.Google Scholar
  4. Dyregrov, A. 2002.Katastrofpsykologi [Emergency psychology] 2nd ed. Lund: Student-litteratur [in Swedish].Google Scholar
  5. Ekman, P. 2005. On the launching of evacuation capsules from a ship in beam seas: Numerical and experimental investigations of shipmotions,wave climate and capsule dynamics, department of shipping andmarine technology. PhD diss., Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg.Google Scholar
  6. Glen, I., G. Igloliorte, E. Galea, and C. Gautier. 2003. Experimental determination of passenger behaviour in ship evacuations in support of advanced evacuation simulation. InPassenger ship safety. London: Royal Institution of Naval Architects (RINA).Google Scholar
  7. Helbing, D., I. Farkas, and T. Vicsek. 2000. Simulating dynamical features of escape panic.Nature 407 (6803): 487–490.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. IMO. 2001a.SOLAS: The International convention for the safety of life at sea. Chapter III, Regulation 8. London: IMO.Google Scholar
  9. —. 2001b.SOLAS: The International convention for the safety of life at sea. Chapter III, Regulation 18. London: IMO.Google Scholar
  10. —. 2001c.SOLAS: The International convention for the safety of life at sea. Chapter III, Regulation 7. London: IMO.Google Scholar
  11. —. 2003a.Life-saving appliances (LSA). MSC.81(70) Revised recommendation on testing of life-saving appliances, Part 1 Section 8 and 12. London: IMO.Google Scholar
  12. —. 2003b.Life-saving appliances (LSA). Chapter II, 2.2.1.2. London: IMO.Google Scholar
  13. —. 2007. MSC.1/Circ.1238 Guidelines for evacuation analysis for new and existing passenger ships. London: IMO.Google Scholar
  14. Jasionowski, A., D. Vassalos, and L. Guarin. 2003. Time-based survival criteria for passenger RO/RO vessels.Marine Technology 40 (4): 278–287.Google Scholar
  15. Jenvald, J., and M. Morin. 2004. Simulator-supported live training for emergency response in hazardous environments.Simulation and Gaming 35 (3): 363–377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Leach. 1994.Survival psychology. Basingstoke: MacMillan.Google Scholar
  17. MAIB. 2001.Safety study:Review of lifeboat and launching systems’ accidents. Southampton: MAIB.Google Scholar
  18. —. 2003.Report on the investigation of a fatal accident during a vertical chute evacuation drill from the UK registered ro-ro ferry P&OSL Aquitaine in Dover harbour on 9 October 2002. Report No 18/2003. Southampton: MAIB.Google Scholar
  19. Morin, M., J. Jenvald, and M. Crissey. 2000. Training needs and training opportunities for emergency response to mass-casualty incidents. InProceedings of the 11 th International Training and Education Conference (ITEC 2000). Hauge, TheNetherlands.Google Scholar
  20. Morin, M., J. Jenvald, and M. Thorstensson. 2000. Computer-supported visualization of rescue operations.Safety Science 35 (1–3): 3–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Ohlsson, K., and K. Johansson. 2001.Riskkommunikation ombord på passagerarfartyg [Emergency communication on board passenger ships].VINNOVAs dnr 2001–06213. Stockholm: Vinnova [in Swedish].Google Scholar
  22. Poole, T., and P. Springett. 2000.Practical crowd management. Fareham: Odyssey Training.Google Scholar
  23. Rutgersson, O., E. Tsychkova, and M. Andersson. 2003. Evacuation of passenger ships in rough weather: A study of equipment behaviour and its interaction with human performance.Naval Architect: 74–88.Google Scholar
  24. Simões Ré, A., and B. Veicht. 2002. Systematic investigation of lifeboat evacuation performance. SNAME Transactions 11: 341–360.Google Scholar
  25. Timstedt, N. 2004. Nödmeddelande över fartygets PA-system [Emergency messages over the ship’s PA-system]. Halmstad: VINNOVA [in Swedish].Google Scholar
  26. Tsychkova, E. 2000. Influence of waves and ship motions on safe evacuation of passenger ships. Lic. thesis, Naval Architecture Department of Vehicle Engineering, Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm.Google Scholar
  27. Wallenius, C. 2001. Human adaption to danger. PhD diss., Department of Psychology, Lund University.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© World Maritime University 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Monica Lundh
    • 1
  • Margareta Lützhöft
    • 1
  • Leif Rydstedt
    • 2
  • Joakim Dahlman
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Shipping andMarine TechnologyChalmers University of TechnologyGothenburgSweden
  2. 2.AHS, Unit of PsychologyLillehammer University College (HiL)LillehammerNorway

Personalised recommendations