Page 44 - 02

44 Y.A. SOYADI, Y.A. SOYADI, Y.A. SOYADI ve Y.A. SOYADI

6. Conclusions

Human errors are one of the most common types of error. Therefore, it is of great importance to
reduce the human errors that will affect the safety and reliability of the vessel. Some factors can
contribute to human errors mainly such as exposure to high level of noise and vibration or stress
due to fishing. These contributions can cause the major human errors as follows:

Misjudge effects (wave, wind, current, speed)
Crew inattention
Failure to ascertain position
Watchkeeper incapacitated on bridge
Failure to utilize available navigation equipment

In this circumference, we have solutions of an educational and organizational based to reduce
human errors. It is obvious that training becomes very important for safety. This would require
a compulsory course related to the human functions such as knowledge of regulations and use of
equipment. Fault tree analysis can be used as a training aid and a tool for increasing awareness.
On the other hand, in order to reduce human errors, vibration and noise should be minimised
because of their significant effects.

The main and the auxiliary power systems in the small spaces on fishing vessel will lead to an
increasing number of complaints by crews considering the noise, the mechanical vibrations and
its effects on their health, stress levels, concentration and safety.

Furthermore, it is possible to reduce the probability of collision by installing a radar, collision
detector and redesign of the bridge equipment. The fishing industry is an outstanding target
group for extension of the use of this sort of instrument, but it will need to be reduced in cost.

The proposed analysis does not address whole fishing vessel safety. In this paper, a trial
application of a formal safety analysis on a generic fishing vessel was attempted. At present
much expert judgement and evidential reasoning from a qualitative point of view is required.
The data required for quantitative assessment is either unavailable or far from the ideal format.
This could be attributed to the organizational structure of the fishing company and/or the
reporting requirement of accidents and incidents.

References:

Devanney J. Formal Safety Assessment in Wonderland. Center for Tankship Excellence,
{USA}, Feb 2013.
Henley, E.J. and Kumamoto, H., Probabilistic Risk Assessment. New York: IEEE Press.,1992.
Health & Safety Executive, HSE, Reducing Risk, Protecting People: HSE‟s decision-making
process, Health & Safety Commission, 2001.
IEC (1994), IEC 60300-3-9: Risk analysis of technological systems, International
Electrotechnical Commision, Geneva, 1994.
IMO, Guidelines for formal safety assessment (FSA) for use in the imo rulemaking process.
International Maritime Organization; 2002.

GiDB|DERGi Sayı 1, 2015