Difference between Marine Casualty and Marine Incident

This article explains the difference between a marine casualty and a marine incident, their definitions, and their impact on ship operations and safety. It also discusses the regulations and requirements for conducting inquiries into these events, as set out by the International Marine Organization (IMO).

Running head: TUTOR MARKED ASSIGNMENT 1
Tutor Marked Assignment
Institutional affiliation
First name Last name

TUTOR MARKED ASSIGNMENT 2
PART A
The difference between a marine casualty and a marine incident
Marine casualty can be well-defined as an arrangement of procedures occurring directly
from the ship operation or is directly connected to the ship operations. Such events may result
from incidences such as the significant injury or death of a person, the impairment of a ship, the
incapacitating of the vessel, the loss of a ship, losing a person from the ship, the endangering of
the safety of the ship through infrastructural damage and pollutions resulting from the damage of
the ship.
A marine incident cab be termed as a system of events occurring that endanger the safe
operations of the ship ,the ship’s occupants, other persons or the environment of operations if not
corrected. The events also occur directly from the operation of the ship and may include near
misses or close quarter situations.
IMO Document and Regulations setting out the terms and conditions under which a flag
state must conduct an inquiry
In its two regulatory documents, the International Convention for the Safety of Life at
Sea (SOLAS) and the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships ("No.
18961. International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea, 1974. Concluded at London on 1
November 1974", 2011) the International Marine Organization defines marine casualties and
marine incidents.

TUTOR MARKED ASSIGNMENT 3
According to the regulations I/21 of the SOLAS and the articles 8 and 12 of the
MARPOL, each administration of various states are required to carry out investigations into
incidences and casualties occurring under ships flying their flags. They are also required to
submit the findings to the International Marine Organizations for the necessary courses of action.
Also according to the international load line convention (1992), articles 23, investigations into
the casualties are required in addition to the articles 94 of the United Nations Convention on the
Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) which requires each state to carry out investigations into casualties
and incidences involving ships carrying their flags in the seas.
Substantially Interested State
The phrase "significantly interested state" can be described as a state whose flag is flown
by a vessel caught in the marine accident or incident or a state whose coastal regions are engaged
in the marine accident or incident. Also, word substantially interested state may refer to the state
whose environment is considerably damaged or endangered by marine casualties including
artificial and natural marine structures and international waters.
Legal rights of a surveyor being interviewed by the Marine Safety Investigating State
Surveyors may get involved into the investigations in two different scenarios including
when the surveyor getting in touch with the vessel in question prior to the incident or casualty
and the surveyor being brought on board as an expert to assist or perform investigations into the
incident. Looking at the surveyor as a witness, the surveyor is contacted to provide evidence on a
vessel which he/she had been actively in contact with prior to the accident. As a witness and
expert, the surveyor is entitled to various rights and protection including:
1. Compliance with the International Regulations.

TUTOR MARKED ASSIGNMENT 4
During the surveyor interview process, the accident investigators are required to adhere strictly
to the national regulations, international regulations and regulations set out in the Casualty
Investigation Code (IMO, 2011). This right is very important to surveyor in that the provided
regulations outlines that standard procedure to be followed during the interview therefore the
surveyor may not be subjected to instances of harassment or forced to provide information. Also,
this legal right and protection of the surveyor ensures that the only correct and accurate
information is provided by the surveyor and consequently reported as the outcome of the
investigation.
2. The right not to be placed under any undue or repeated burden
In order to guarantee that the surveyor is not exposed to any undue or repeated burden, the
researchers should guarantee collaboration with other parties. This ensures that the surveyor is
not overworked through unnecessary multiple conferences and timely reporting is given on the
results of the inquiry.
3. The surveyor cannot be self-incriminated
The case that under the Casualty Investigation Code, a surveyor can not self-incriminate. This
means that in the course of an investigation, the surveyor can not be prosecuted based on the
proof they provide. Therefore, the surveyor can provide precise data for the precise inquiry result
without fear.
4. Investigation report provided by the expert surveyor in the course of the investigation
may only be used for the purposes of the investigation and should not be disclosed to
criminals by the substantially interest states. This helps in the maintenance of the
credibility of the report provided by the surveyor as an expert.

TUTOR MARKED ASSIGNMENT 5
5. Making of Reference
The surveyor should be allowed to make reference to his/her notes in the report during the
interview. This helps the surveyor provide information confined within his/her knowledge on the
investigation of the marine incident and accuracy of the outcome of the investigation.

TUTOR MARKED ASSIGNMENT 6
A: T A Sequential Fact Diagram (SFD) for the capsizing of the Louisa S Y 30

TUTOR MARKED ASSIGNMENT 7
B: Write a factual report based on your SFD.
The sinking of the Louisa S Y 30 angling vessel is one among several of its sort. In fact,
the frequency happened while tied down adrift, off the isle of Mingulay. Further examinations
that were led after the episode uncovered that the in all probability occurrence trigger was
flooding of the overlap (Cox, 2015). Moreover, the circumstance was exacerbated by the way
that the captain and his team were exhausted after extended periods of time of angling and in this
manner chose to have some rest. Moreover, analysts discovered that refrigerated water from the
snares had continually been filling the bilge's poles and hence caused some awkward commotion
at whatever point the vessel rolled. In an offer to cushion the related commotion, the team
individuals debilitated the caution. Without a doubt, the group had been acclimated with turning
off the alert signal in the hold bilge. All things considered, this to a great extent added to the
sinking of the Louisa vessel (Cox, 2015).
The flooding on the ship can be ascribed to a flawed vivier framework. All things
considered, a vivier framework is a compartment on the angling vessel that is utilized to house
fish. Shellfish, for instance, require to be continually sustained in ocean water to keep up their
quality as favored by their clients. The vivier framework's deficiency principally realized
flooding as it's intended to persistently siphon ocean water to the capacity compartment.
Upon acknowledgment that the vessel was sinking, the team individuals hastily acted to
rescue it. At first, their senses drove them to dispatch the existence pontoon on the vessel. Sadly,
the life-pontoon neglected to dispatch. Examinations demonstrated that the life-pontoon
neglected to swell and consequently totally neglected to work. Regardless of wild eyed
endeavors to consolidate the utilization of floats to help the existence pontoon, the heaviness of
the group individuals surpassed that of the existence pontoon and in this way, it sank. According

TUTOR MARKED ASSIGNMENT 8
to Williams (2017), the inability to swell was brought about by a vacant Carbon dioxide
chamber. Generally, specialists discovered that the chamber had two splits as an afterthought,
and hence couldn't suit to top off the chamber.
Instantly before the group left the ship, they had the option to enact the vessel's crisis
position demonstrating radio guide (EPIRB).Unfortunately, the sign gathering by the United
Kingdom Mission Control Center (UKMCC).was to some degree late and in this way try salvage
endeavors berserk. Scientists discovered that the UKMCC handed-off the message to HM
Coastguard, yet disarray over language brought about deferrals before pursuit and salvage units
were sent to the scene
Without a doubt, the scientists implied out that had the sign been gotten before, the
salvage endeavors would have been a lot simpler and brief, in this manner bearing additionally
enduring team individuals. After bouncing into the water, the group individuals were tested by
ideas of nature. In reality, the water demonstrated too cold to even consider bearing for three of
the team individuals (Peters, 2015). In spite of the group individuals decorating themselves in
lifeline coats, it didn't prevent the virus water from desensitizing their bodies and in this manner
rendering them frail. Accordingly, three team individuals were discovered coasting superficially,
face down.
In conclusion, Louisa angling vessel is among numerous boats that have in the ongoing
past, sunk under bizarre conditions. The vessel's team was having a speedy rest when the ship
started to sink. The sinking was brought about by flooding, brought about by the vivier
arrangement of the vessel. In an offer to spare the ship and group, the individuals propelled an
actual existence pontoon yet understood its flawed nature, chastised by a vacant carbon dioxide
chamber. Further, their weight couldn't bolster the existence pontoon, in spite of supporting it

TUTOR MARKED ASSIGNMENT 9
with floats. Moderate gathering of sign from the radio correspondence further came about to
moderate reaction by significant partners and in this manner prompted three fatalities.
PART B
The procedure followed when conducting or witnessing an inclining experiment
The inclining experiment is conducted by the use of a stabilograph and is it is done to
determine the Metacentric height of the ship. Stabilograpg is made up of a heavy pendulum that
set to balance on the knife edge then connected to a pointer which records the readings of the
heel angle (Marineinsight, 2018).
First a minimum of two stabilographs are obtained and placed a highest distance from
each other with one at the forward and the other at the raft. Four masses are then obtained and
placed at the deck of the ship with two at each sides of the mid ship from the center line. The
next step involves the movement of the masses one at different positions at a time with the four
masses on one side, the other side and then two masses on each side. As the masses are moved,
the stabilograph deflects and the deflections recorded. The average deflections then calculated
and used to determine the metacentric height.
Let, Ѳ be the angle of heel and G1 is the moved position of the center of gravity after
inclination. Then;
GG1= GM tan Ѳ
GG1 is = m x d/Δ, where m= mass moved, d= distance by which the mass is moved and Δ=
displacement of ship

TUTOR MARKED ASSIGNMENT 10
Hence GM = m x d /Δ tanѲ where GM is metacentric height and tan Ѳ is determined by the
readings of stabilograph.
Three conditions which would render the result of the experiment inaccurate.
According to the IACS (2004), Regulations 2004 of the International Annealed Copper
Standard on the Inclining test unified procedure (No.31 – IACS), the following conditions are
important for the accuracy of the procedure.
1. For the test to be accurate, the ship under test should be as near to completion as possible
and the equipment used by the yard on board should be limited to the utmost extent
possible.
2. Also, all objects should be secured in their regular positions that is, all weights which
may swing or shift must be confined in their known position.
3. For accuracy, the ship under test should be cleared of residues of cargo, tools, debris,
scaffolding and snow and icing of the inner and outer surfaces, the underwater hull
included is not allowed.

TUTOR MARKED ASSIGNMENT 11
The reduction in GM when the crane lifts the weight from the deck
Light weight = 8,000 tonnes
Loaded weight = 65 tonnes
KB= 4.25 m
KG= 6.75 m
KM = 7.65 m
We know that KM = KB + BM, GM = KM – KG
Therefore, original GM =7.65 – 6.75 = 0.9 m
When the load is removed or discharged it will be noticed that the mass is vertically below G,
and that when discharged G will move vertically upwards to G1

TUTOR MARKED ASSIGNMENT 12
But GG1 = (w x d) / Final mass (m) , where GG 1 is the shift of the center of gravity of the body,
w is the mass removed, and d is the distance between the center of gravity of the mass removed
and the center of gravity of the body (Barrass,2011).
The crane is 12m above deck, thus d =12 m, w= 65 tonnes, Final mass = 8,000 tonnes
GG1 = (65 x 12)/8,000 = 0.0975 m
Therefore the reduction in GM = 0.0975 m
New GM = 0.9 – 0.0975 = 0.8025 m

TUTOR MARKED ASSIGNMENT 13
References
No. 18961. International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea, 1974. Concluded at London on 1
November 1974. (2011). United Nations Treaty Series Treaty Series 1891, 404-405.
doi:10.18356/c0eba80a-en-fr
IMO. (1973). International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships.
UNCLOS. (1982). United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea of 10 December 1982.
Retrieved from
https://www.un.org/depts/los/convention_agreements/convention_overview_convention.
htm
Peters, S.M., 2015. Making Waves: Michigan’s Boat-building Industry, 1865-2000. University
of Michigan.
Cox, C. (2015). Suppression of breakers in stormy seas by an oil film. International Journal
of Maritime History, 27(3), 528-536. doi:10.1177/0843871415588671
Williams, G.H., 2017. The United States Merchant Marine in World War I: Ships, Crews,
Shipbuilders and Operators. McFarland.
Marineinsight. 2018 .Inclining Experiment- Determining Metacentric height of the ship.
Retrieved from https://www.marineinsight.com/naval-architecture/inclining-experiment-
determining-metacentric-height-of-the-ship/
IACS. (2004). Inclining test unified procedure No.31 – IACS. Accessed on 28th June, 2019 from
http://www.iacs.org.uk/download/1976 .
Barrass, B., & Derrett, C. D. (2011). Ship stability for masters and mates. Elsevier.
IMO. (2011).Code of the International Standards and Recommended Practices for a Safety
Investigation into a Marine Casualty or Marine Incident. Accessed on 28th June, 2019

TUTOR MARKED ASSIGNMENT 14
from http://www.imo.org/en/OurWork/MSAS/Casualties/Documents/Res.
%20MSC.255(84)%20Casualty%20Iinvestigation%20Code.pdf