Skip to main content
Log in

Maritime safety — to measure is to improve

  • Published:
Marine Systems & Ocean Technology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The Design for Safety philosophy and the ensuing formalized methodology, Risk-Based Design, was introduced in the maritime industry in the mid-nineties as a design paradigm to help bestow safety as a design objective and a life-cycle imperative. This was meant to ensure that rendering safety a design driver, would incentivize the industry to seek for cost-effective safety solutions, in response to rising societal expectations for human life safety. It turned out that the removal of rules-imposed (largely-conservative) constraints and the adoption of a performance-based approach to address safety has had much more profound effects than originally anticipated, the full impact of which is yet to be delivered. This paper focuses on what constitutes the kernel of this design philosophy, namely the measurement and verification of safety itself with emphasis on passenger ships and the implications that this entails with regards to traditional approaches and the new safety system.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Vassalos, D. (1999), “Shaping Ship Safety: The Face of the Future”, Journal of Marine Technology, Vol. 36, No. 4, pp. 1–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vassalos, D. (2008), “(Chapter 2: Risk-Based Ship Design) in Papanikolaou, A., (Editor): Risk-Based Ship Design — Methods, Tools and Applications”, Springer, ISBN 978-3-540-89042-6, pp. 17–98.

    Google Scholar 

  • IMO FSA (2002), “Guidelines for Formal Safety Assessment for Use in the Rule-Making Process”. MSC.1-Circ. 1023–MEPC.1-Circ.392, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  • HSE Safety Case (2005), “The Offshore Installation (Safety Case) Regulations, UKSI 3117”.

    Google Scholar 

  • IMO ADA (2006), “Guideline on Alternative Designs and Arrangements for SOLAS chapter II-1 and III,” MSC/Circ.1212.

    Google Scholar 

  • IMO MSC 85 (2009), “FSA Cruise Ships”, submitted by Denmark.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jasionowski, A., Vassalos, D. (2006), “Conceptualising Risk”, 9th International Conference on Stability of Ships and Ocean Vehicles, Rio de Janeiro.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vassalos, D., Guarin, L., Vassalos, G., Bole, M., Kim, H.S., Majumder, L. (2003), “Advanced Evacuation Analysis — Testing the Ground on Ships”, 2nd International Conference on Pedestrian and Evacuation Dynamics, PED 2003, Greenwich, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jasionowski, A. (2005), “An integrated approach to damage ship survivability assessment”, PhD, University of Strathclyde.

    Google Scholar 

  • IMO (2003), MSC77/INF.12 — SAFEDOR. Risk-Based Design, Operation and Regulation of Ships.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dracos Vassalos.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Vassalos, D. Maritime safety — to measure is to improve. Mar. Syst. Ocean Technol. 8, 61–69 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03449270

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03449270

Keywords

Navigation