GL REQUIREMENTS FOR RO RO SHIPS

GL REQUIREMENTS FOR RO RO SHIPS. CLICK FOLLOWING SITE


http://www.gl-group.com/infoServices/rules/pdfs/gl_iv-11-1_e.pdf

MORE DETILS ABOUT RO-RO SHIPS

http://www.mar.ist.utl.pt/mventura/Projecto-Navios-I/EN/SD-1.4.4-RO-RO%20Ships.pdf

RO- RO SAFETY PART 2

A further important point made by the

dNV study was that the

ro-ro ships most frequently

exposed to serious casualties and total losses were the pure

ro-ro and freight-only types. Pure

ro-ros

had a high percentage share of all casualties and especially of total losses. Passenger ferries, on the

other hand, had a fairly high percentage share of all categories but the serious casualty/total loss

frequency was relatively low.

The study also showed that the total loss rate for

ro-ros was significantly

lower

than the

average for the world fleet (under 0.25% over the 13-year period compared with about 0.55% for the

world fleet).

A quick look at some of the best-known accidents involving

ro-ro ships

also indicates some

of the major problem areas. Several of them involved water getting on to the vehicle deck through

the cargo doors, either as a result of a mistake or an accident.

The first

ro-ro ship to be lost at sea was the

Princess Victoria,

a rail ferry which sank on a

voyage to Belfast in 1953 when heavy seas stove in the stern door: 133 lives were lost. At least 264

people died in 1966 when the Greek ferry

Heraklion

sank in heavy seas on a voyage to Piraeus.

Although not a

ro-ro, the ship did have a large car deck without

subdivisional bulkheads. This deck

flooded when

the loading hatch was smashed by a vehicle which had broken loose. The cargo

ro-ro

Hero

was lost in 1977, partly as a result of water entering through a leaking stern door. In September

1994 the passenger

ro-ro

Estonia

was lost with more than 900 lives when

the bow door was torn off

by heavy seas. The car deck flooded and the ship capsized within a few minutes (see page 20).

These accidents happened in heavy seas, but other

ro-ros have been lost through water

entering doors in port or sheltered waters.

They include the

Straitsman

,

which sank when the stern

door was opened as the ship approached land, with the crew unaware that the door sill was below the

waterline: and the

Seaspeed

Dora

, which capsized in 1977 when a movement of cargo caused the

ship to list sufficiently for water to enter through an open bunkering door. In the case of the

Herald

of Free Enterprise

, water entered through the bow door which had been left open (see page 13).

Ro-

ro

ships which have sunk rapidly as a result of a collision have included the

Jolly

Azzurro

(1978),

Collo

(1980),

Tollan

(1980),

Sloman Ranger

(1980),

Ems

(1981),

European Gateway

(

1983)

and

Mont Louis

(1984).

Among

ships which have been lost following a shift of cargo are the

Espresso

Sardegna

(1973),

Zenobia

(1980) and

Mekhanik

Tarasov

(1982, in very bad weather).

How safe are ro-ros?

How safe are

ro-ros?

Because of the publicity surrounding accidents involving passenger

ro-ro ships such as the

Herald of

Free Enterprise, Scandinavian Star

and

Estonia

it is sometimes assumed that this type of ship is

much more dangerous

than others. This is not borne out by statistics. The World Casualty Statistics

for 1994 published by Lloyd's Register of Shipping show that passenger/

ro-

ro cargo loss rate per

thousand ships was 2.3 - the same as the average figure for all ships.

However, when one considers loss of life at sea the picture changes. Between 1989 and

1994, the Lloyd's Register figures show that 4,583 lives were lost in accidents at sea. Of these 1,544

were lost in accidents involving passenger/

ro-

ro cargo ships - exactly one third, even though

ro-ro

ships make up only a small fraction of world merchant marine tonnage. This would seem to indicate

that although passenger

ro-ro ships are involved in an

average number of accidents the

consequences of those accidents are usually far worse.

An important study concerning the safety of

ro-ro

ships (including cargo ships) was

submitted to IMO in 1983 by Norway. The study was compiled by the classification society

det

Norske

Veritas and covered the years 1965-1982. Of 341 casualties during the period, 217 were

defined as serious and 36 resulted in the total loss of the ship.

The study showed that the most common causes of serious casualties were collisions (24%);

machinery damage (17%): grounding (17%); shift of cargo and operational (16%); fire and explosion

(14%). The figures changed significantly when total losses were studied. Here the most common

cause was shift of cargo and operational faults (43%)

; collision (25%) and fire and explosion (18%).

The

dNV study showed that total losses as a result of a collision were much higher for

ro-ros

than for other ships (with only a 9% occurrence). Both collisions and uncontrolled shifts of cargo

more frequently led to serious consequences with

ro-ros.

The paper noted that more than 70% of all

ro-ro total losses due to collision resulted in loss

of lives while 60% of ships reported to have capsized or sunk following a collision did so in less than

ten minutes. Nearly all of the total losses involved ships of less than 110 metres in length.

RO-RO SHIP SAFETY

Focus on IMO

International Maritime Organization, 4 Albert Embankment, London SE1 7SR, United Kingdom

Tel: +44 (0)20 7735 7611 Fax: +44 (0)20 7587 3210

E-mail:

rkohn@imo.org

or

nbrown@imo.org

Web site:

www.imo.org

IMO and

ro-ro safety

The roll-on/roll-off ship 1

is one of the most successful types operating today. Its flexibility

,

ability to

integrate with other transport systems and speed of operation have made

it extremely popular on

many shipping routes.

The roll-on/roll-off ship is defined in the November 1995 amendments to Chapter II-1 of the

International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS), 1974 as being "a passenger ship

with

ro-ro cargo spaces or special category spaces..."

One of the

ro-ro ship's most important roles is as a passenger/car ferry, particularly on short-

sea routes. But despite its commercial success, the

ro-ro concept has always had its critics. There

have been disturbing accidents involving different types of

ro-ro ship, the worst being the sudden

and catastrophic capsizing of the passenger/car ferry

Herald of Free Enterprise

in March 1987 and

the even more tragic loss of the

Estonia

in September 1994.

This

paper looks at the background of

ro-ros, the problems involved and the way in which

IMO has endeavoured to tackle them.

The development of

ro-ros

The modern roll-on/roll-off ship can trace its origins back more than one hundred years to the early

days of the steam train. Ships were specially designed to take trains across rivers which were too

wide for bridges: the ships were equipped with rails, and the trains simply rolled straight on to the

ship, which sailed across the river to another rail berth where the train would roll off again. An

example is the Firth of Forth ferry in

Scotland which began operations in 1851.

It was not until the Second World War, however, that the idea of applying the

ro-ro principle

of road transport became practicable - and was used in constructing the tank landing craft used at D-

Day and in other battles.

The principle was applied to merchant ships in the late 1940s and early

1950s. It proved to be extremely popular, especially on short-sea ferry routes, encouraged by

technical developments on land as well as sea, notably the increase in road transport.

 

 

 Until the early 1950s someone wishing to

take his car from one country to another by sea had to get it loaded into the ship's hold by crane, a

time-consuming and expensive process. The development of the

ro-ro car ferry changed all that and

many ports boomed as a result.

In the United Kingdom, Dover's first pair of drive-on berths was opened in 1953. Until then

the port had handled only 10,000 crane-loaded cars each year and forecasts that the berths would

enable the port to handle ten times that many must have seemed decidedly optimistic. But the

100,000 figure was exceeded in the first year and by 1985 Dover was handling over 2.5 million

vehicles and units through nine

ro-ro berths. By 1994 the total had risen to more than 4.5 million.

By 1994 around 4,600

ro-ro ships were in operation around the world: They are particularly

popular in Europe, and trading patterns reflect this.

Whereas pure container ships are to be found in

large numbers operating between Europe and North America, Europe and Japan and Japan and North

America,

ro-ros

operate primarily between Europe and North America and Europe and the Middle

East, although there is an important trade between North America and the Caribbean.

Today the world

ro-ro fleet can be subdivided into a number of different types. They include

ships designed to carry freight vehicles only; to carry a combination of containers and freight

vehicles

and to transport cars without passengers. There are various other types and freight-only

ro-

ro ships form about two thirds of the world

ro-ro fleet at present.

However, the

best known

ro-ro ships are ferries designed to transport commercial vehicles

and private cars, together with large numbers of passengers, usually on short voyages.