Introduction
This accident investigation report examines the incident involving the cargo ship Oceanic Queen, which ran aground while approaching its berth in the UK port of Solent. The report comprehensively summarizes the accident incident, identifies the causal factors, and recommends future best practices to prevent similar incidents. The investigation revealed that the ship’s bridge team’s communications could have been improved, track monitoring needed to be enhanced, and Bridge Resource Management (BRM) techniques were insufficient. Moreover, the crew needed to become more familiar with the Electronic Chart Display and Information System (ECDIS).
The report recommends improving the crew’s familiarity with the ECDIS, enhancing the BRM training on the fleet of vessels, and ensuring effective communication among the bridge team. The report provides comprehensive insights into the causal factors and error chain that can lead to incidents, the importance of BRM techniques, and the significance of identifying and interpreting accident investigation reports to learn from them effectively.
Cargo Ship Grounding in Solent, UK
The global shipping industry facilitates about 90% of the world’s trade, as it helps transport goods from one location to another over long distances. However, large ship operations have long been considered inherently risky, and accidents have resulted in significant ship and cargo losses. Studies indicate that even though ship losses have reduced significantly over the past decade, the International Maritime Organization indicated in a safety and shipping review that “705 shipping accidents occurred in 2020, resulting in damages to human life, the cargo, the environment, and the overall economic sustainability” (Sepehri et al., 2022, p. 243). Investigating such incidents is critical to identifying the root cause and preventing future occurrences. This report presents an accident investigation into the Oceanic Queen cargo ship, which ran aground while heading to its berth in Solent, UK.
This report focuses on the problem of inadequate BRM techniques and crew familiarity with the ECDIS that led to the cargo ship’s grounding. It recreates the incident on a shore-based bridge simulator, provides a summary, identifies the causal factors leading up to the incident, and analyzes what went wrong on board the ship on that day and why. Furthermore, the report recommends ways the shipping company can enhance BRM training on its fleet to prevent similar incidents from recurring.
This report aims to investigate the incident, identify the root causes, provide recommendations for improving BRM training, and reflect industry best practices in bridge resource management, safe bridge management, and operation. The limitations of this report include its focus on failures in the bridge team and navigation of the vessel, rather than other aspects of ship operations. Moreover, the investigation is limited to the information provided, and some aspects may not be fully explored due to the lack of data.
This work emphasizes the importance of utilizing adequate BRM techniques and ensuring crew familiarity with the ECDIS, which can help prevent similar incidents from occurring in the future. The report situates the work within the context of preceding research in navigation safety and bridge resource management, emphasizing the need for continuous improvement and adherence to industry best practices and regulations.
Summary of the Incident
On 13 November 2021, the Oceanic Queen, a cargo ship of about 50,000 tons, approached the Solent port in the United Kingdom. On this particular day, two tugboats, the SV Swift and the SV Stronghold, accompanied the Oceanic Queen as it navigated the channel toward the berthing area. In addition to Captain Tom, who is the Master operating the ship and has a pilotage exemption, the ship has a crew of 23. As the MV Oceanic Queen was making a turn to approach the berth, it suddenly veered off course and ran aground on a sandbank.
This accident occurred despite clear visibility. Its intense impact resulted in a 60-meter-long scratch on the ship’s hull, causing significant damage and leaving it stranded in the middle of the channel. Without hesitation, the tugboats rushed to the scene to assess the situation and offer necessary assistance. Upon further investigation into how the accident occurred, reports indicated that no pilot was on board, as the Master had a pilotage exemption. Additionally, even though the ECDIS was operating correctly, the crew needed to familiarize themselves with its use.
Causal Factors
The case summary clearly indicates that the Oceanic Queen was not operating with a pilot, despite the Master, Captain Tom, holding a pilotage exemption. The pilot in the vessel always ensures that they provide further instruction and assistance whenever a challenge arises during transportation (Gucma and Łazuga, 2019).
In this instance, the absence of a pilot may have contributed to the vessel’s grounding, as the pilot could have provided additional assistance in navigating the vessel in a narrow channel. Additionally, since the vessel was highly dependent on technology, the Master and the bridge team were unaware of the situation when the vessel lost control; the pilot’s lack of support caused the accident.
Lack of Crew Familiarity with the ECDIS
The ECDIS is a recent development in naval vessels and ships, allowing easy navigation of their system. The introduction of ECDIS has made it simpler for a ship’s navigating crew to identify locations and get directions more effectively (Kim, Lee, and Youn, 2020). The automatic features, such as route monitoring, route planning, ENC updating, and automatic ETA computation, increase maritime safety and significantly reduce the navigator’s workload (Kara, Arican, and Oksas, 2020).
The ECDIS also offers a wide range of sophisticated navigation and safety capabilities, including continuous data recording for later analysis and study. With the introduction of this system, organizations in this industry must ensure that their crew is well-versed in it to avoid issues during operation (Contarinis, Kastrisios, and Nakos, 2023).
In the case of the Oceanic Queen, the crew’s lack of familiarity with the ECDIS contributed to the incident. The ECDIS is an essential tool for safe navigation, and its proper use and familiarity are crucial for navigating safely (Herwadkar, 2019). The investigation identified a need for proper training and knowledge of the ECDIS system among the crew, which may have contributed to navigation errors.
Poor Bridge Team Communication
Another cause of the Oceanic Queen disaster was inadequate team communication. Studies indicate that ship crashes and other problems are still caused mainly by communication breakdowns among bridge crew members (Boström, 2020). When there is no proper communication with the bridge team, faults and many other issues experienced while operating the ship cannot be sent to them for assistance (“The Editorial Team,” 2020).
In the Oceanic Queen’s scenario, the crew could have communicated more effectively, leading to misunderstandings and misinterpretations of the vessel’s situation, location, and movements. Ultimately, the misunderstandings and misinterpretations led to ineffective decision-making, which resulted in the ship’s grounding.
Poor Track Monitoring
The other cause of the Oceanic Queen accident was poor track monitoring. Track monitoring involves keeping a close watch on the vessel’s progress and position on the chart, noting any unusual activity that may be occurring (Wawrzyniak, Hyla, and Popik, 2019). This significantly helps prevent accidents even when the pilot is not there and when the system fails (Boström, 2020). However, investigations revealed that the crew needed to monitor the Oceanic Queen track more closely, leading it to stray from the navigational channel and run aground.
Inadequate BRM Techniques
The last cause of the ship’s accident was inadequate Bridge Resource Management techniques. BRM is an effective management tool that makes navigation safer. It involves proper communication, teamwork, and decision-making skills. Studies indicate that the basic principle of BRM is that a single person cannot handle ship navigation and operation.
To guarantee the vessel’s journey is completed safely, BRM uses all onboard resources, including equipment, knowledge, and human resources (Mukherjee, 2021). Like all operating systems, a single point of failure should be present to protect the vessel’s navigation and control. Investigations into this ship’s accident indicated that inadequate BRM contributed to the incident. It was found that the crew members lacked the necessary BRM skills to navigate the vessel safely.
What Went Wrong and Why
One of the causes of the accident was human error. Studies indicate that humans, “While the frequency of accidents is declining, human error continues to be a dominant factor in approximately 80 to 85% of maritime accidents” (Sánchez-Beaskoetxea et al., 2021). One human error in this accident was the lack of a pilot. Even though the Master had a pilotage exemption, they chose to navigate the vessel without the pilot’s assistance. This decision significantly compromised the ship’s safe navigation, as pilots are professionals with the necessary information about navigational hazards and local waters.
Furthermore, poor communication with the bridge team was another human error that caused the accident. The bridge team’s communication led to misunderstanding and misinterpretation of how the ship was moving. This fault created an error chain, leading to the vessel deviating from the navigational channel.
The capitan failed to ensure that the bridge team was adequately trained in BRM, resulting in a lack of coordination and situational awareness on the bridge.Also, poor track monitoring of the vessel contributed to the accident.There was no regular review of the ship’s position and direction, making the bridge team unaware of what was happening. Lastly, the crew members lacked the necessary BRM expertise to navigate the vessel safely and prevent the accident from happening.
Maritime is often designed to address the different issues that vessels encounter. However, studies indicate that Engine failures, electronic system issues, and other equipment failures are to blame for many marine accidents (Contarinis, Kastrisios, and Nakos, 2023). One equipment failure that led to the ship’s accident was associated with the ECDIS. Even though the system operated as expected, the crew needed more training to use it effectively, which resulted in the incorrect interpretation of the ship’s position.
Recommendations
ECDIS Training
The ECDIS plays a significant role in ship navigation. Studies indicate that introducing ECDIS simplified the ship’s navigating crew’s ability to identify locations and get directions more effectively (Palma, Gilgo, and Tei, 2022). Therefore, to utilize this system, the shipping company should ensure that all crew members and other staff are adequately trained and familiar with the different technological systems used to navigate the ship, especially the ECDIS system.This should include regular training and refresher courses on properly using and interpreting the system.
BRM Training
Bridge Resource Management is a tool that helps ensure the safe navigation of ships. Additionally, studies ensure that BRM’s basic principle is that ship navigation and operation are the roles of different parties (Boström, 2020). Therefore, the shipping company should review and update its BRM training program to ensure that it is comprehensive and effective in promoting safe navigation practices. This should include regular training sessions and simulations to ensure all crew members are familiar with best practices and can effectively apply them during operations.
Communication
Proper communication ensures that the crew members and other parties coordinate and avoid errors. The shipping company should promote effective communication among the bridge team by implementing clear protocols and encouraging team members to communicate frequently and effectively during operations (Sánchez-Beaskoetxea et al., 2021). This could include regular drills and simulations to improve communication skills and teamwork among crew members.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the cargo ship’s grounding incident in Solent, UK, was caused by several causal factors, including the absence of a pilot and the crew’s inadequate knowledge and experience with the ECDIS system. Furthermore, aspects such as poor communication among the bridge team members and inadequate track monitoring might have contributed to the incident. The shipping company should implement the recommended improvements to ensure safe and effective vessel navigation in the future.
Reference List
Boström, M. (2020) ‘Mind the gap! A quantitative comparison between ship-to-ship communication and intended communication protocol,’ Safety Science, 123, p.104567. Web.
Contarinis, S., Kastrisios, C. and Nakos, B. (2023) ‘Marine protected areas and electronic navigational charts: Legal foundation, mapping methods, IHO S-122 portrayal, and advanced navigation services,’ Euro-Mediterranean Journal for Environmental Integration, pp.1-21. Web.
Dominguez-Péry, C. et al. (2021) ‘Reducing maritime accidents in ships by tackling human error: A bibliometric review and research agenda,’ Journal of Shipping and Trade, 6, pp.1-32. Web.
Gucma, L. and Łazuga, K. (2019) ‘Analysis of the impact of exemption from pilotage for 75m and 90m long vessels on the fairway Świnoujście-szczecin,’ TransNav: International Journal on Marine Navigation and Safety of Sea Transportation, 13(3). Web.
Herwadkar, N. (2019) ‘Pros and cons of ECDIS or paperless navigation of ships’. Web.
Kara, G., Arıcan, O.H. and Okşaş, O. (2020) ‘Analysis of the effect of electronic chart display and information system simulation technologies in maritime education,’ Marine Technology Society Journal, 54(3), pp.43-57. Web.
Kim, I., Lee, S. and Youn, I. (2020) ‘Adopting the audible alert system for the electronic chart display and information system for improvement of early navigational situation awareness,’ Journal of International Maritime Safety, Environmental Affairs, and Shipping, 4(4), pp.177-186. Web.
Mukherjee, P. (2021) ‘Understanding bridge resource management and its key elements on board ships.’Web.
Palma, V., Giglio, D. and Tei, A. (2022) ‘Investigating the introduction of e-navigation and S-100 into bridge-related operations: The impact over seafarers,’ WMU Journal of Maritime Affairs, pp.1-22. Web.
Sánchez-Beaskoetxea, J. et al. (2021) ‘Human error in marine accidents: Is the crew normally to blame?Maritime Transport Research, 2. Web.
Sepehri, A. et al. (2022) ‘The impact of shipping 4.0 on controlling shipping accidents: A systematic literature review,’ Ocean Engineering, 243, p.110162. Web.
The Editorial Team. (2020) ‘Communication a main factor of accidents at sea: Three real-life examples.’ Web.
Wawrzyniak, N., Hyla, T. and Popik, A. (2019) ‘Vessel detection and tracking method based on video surveillance,’ Sensors, 19(23), p.5230. Web.