Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T07:40:46.014Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Frequency of Ship Collisions in the Strait of Messina through Regulatory and Environmental Constraints Assessment

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 March 2017

F. Cucinotta Open the ORCID record for F. Cucinotta [Opens in a new window] ,
E. Guglielmino  and
F. Sfravara
F. Cucinotta*
Affiliation:
(University of Messina - Department of Engineering Contrada di Dio, 98166 Messina)
E. Guglielmino
Affiliation:
(University of Messina - Department of Engineering Contrada di Dio, 98166 Messina)
F. Sfravara
Affiliation:
(University of Messina - Department of Engineering Contrada di Dio, 98166 Messina)
*
(E-mail: [email protected])
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The Strait of Messina is a very busy sea area that separates Sicily and the Italian mainland. In respect of environment and for the prevention of human loss, it is fundamental to have an estimate of the possible ship accidents that could occur. In this work, the approach used is the International Association of Lighthouse Authorities Waterways Risk Assessment Program (IWRAP) model. The first part of the paper describes the local and global traffic and the separation scheme in the Strait of Messina. The model input data is obtained from the Vessel Traffic Service (VTS) system thanks to the Coast Guard of Messina. The second part concerns calculation of the geometrical collisions (number of collisions in different scenarios) and the causation probability. This analysis is the basis for the discussion of new regulatory constraints due to the future realisation of new piers in the south and the planned unification of the two Port Authorities of the two shores into one single authority.

Keywords

Marine traffic safetySafety designShip collisionRegulatory and environmental constraints
Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Navigation , Volume 70 , Issue 5 , September 2017 , pp. 1002 - 1022
Copyright
Copyright © The Royal Institute of Navigation 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Akhtar, J., Bjørnskau, T. and Jean-Hansen, V. (2012). Oil spill risk analysis of routeing heavy ship traffic in Norwegian waters. WMU Journal of Maritime Affairs, 11(2), 233–247.Google Scholar
Akten, N. (2004). Analysis of Shipping Casualties in the Bosphorus. Journal of Navigation, 57(3), 345–356.Google Scholar
Anon. (2004). SAFEDOR PROJECT. Available at: http://www.safedor.org/about/index.htm.Google Scholar
Debnath, A.K. and Chin, H.C. (2010). Navigational Traffic Conflict Technique: A Proactive Approach to Quantitative Measurement of Collision Risks in Port Waters. Journal of Navigation, 63(1), 137.Google Scholar
Det Norske Veritas. (1992). Structural reliability analysis of marine structures. Classification note no. 30·6, Høvik.Google Scholar
Van Dorp, J.R. and Merrick, J.R.W. (2011). On a risk management analysis of oil spill risk using maritime transportation system simulation. Annals of Operations Research, 187(1), 249–277.Google Scholar
Eleye-Datubo, A.G., Wall, A., Saajedi, A. and Wang, J. (2006). Enabling a Powerful Marine and Offshore Decision-Support Solution Through Bayesian Network Technique. Risk Analysis, 26(3), 695–721.Google Scholar
Fujii, Y. and Mizuki, N. (1998). Design of VTS systems for water with bridges. In Gluver & Olsen, eds. International Symposium on Advances in Ship Collision Analysis. Copenhagen, 177–190.Google Scholar
Fujii, Y. and Shiobara, R. (1971). The Analysis of Traffic Accidents. Journal of Navigation, 24(4), 534.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gattuso, D., Meduri, G. and Cardinale, G. (2007) Securmed. Interregional and Transnational Approach about maritime safety and defense of Mediterranean western area. Project INTERREG III B. C.I.Su.T., Reggio Calabria, 228–233.Google Scholar
Gattuso, D., Napoli, S. and Meduri, A.G. (2009). Safety of the navigation in congested maritime area: The case of the Messina Strait. European Transport, 42, 83–101.Google Scholar
Gluver, H. and Olsen, D. (1998). Current practice in risk analysis of ship collisions to bridges. Proceedings of the international symposium on advances in ship collision analysis. Rotterdam, 85–96.Google Scholar
Goerlandt, F. and Kujala, P. (2011). Traffic simulation based ship collision probability modeling. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 96(1), 91–107.Google Scholar
Goerlandt, F. and Montewka, J. (2015). A framework for risk analysis of maritime transportation systems: A case study for oil spill from tankers in a ship-ship collision. Safety Science, 76, 42–66.Google Scholar
Goerlandt, F. and Montewka, J. (2015b). Maritime transportation risk analysis?: Review and analysis in light of some foundational issues. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 138, 115–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goerlandt, F. and Reniers, G. (2016). On the assessment of uncertainty in risk diagrams. Safety Science, 84, pp. 67–77. Available at: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0925753515003215.Google Scholar
Guedes Soares, C., Rongnstad, K. and Olofsson, M. (1997). Impact of human element in marine risk management. Advances in safety and reliability. 857–868.Google Scholar
Hänninen, M. and Kujala, P. (2012). Influences of variables on ship collision probability in a Bayesian belief network model. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 102, 27–40.Google Scholar
Harrald, J., Mazzuchi, T.A., Spahn, J., Van Dorp, R., Merrick, J., Shrestha, S. and Grabowski, M. (1998). Using system simulation to model the impact of human error in a maritime system. Safety Science, 30(1–2), 235–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hu, S., Fang, Q., Xia, H. and Xi, Y. (2007). Formal safety assessment based on relative risks model in ship navigation. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 92(3), 369–377.Google Scholar
International Association of Lighthouse Authorities (IALA). (2009). Risk Management Tool for Ports and Restricted Waterways (IWRAP), France.Google Scholar
International Maritime Organization (IMO). (2006). International Maritime Dangerous Goods Code, Incorporating Amendment 33-06, Vol. 1, ISBN-13: 978-92-801-4214-3, London.Google Scholar
International Maritime Organization (IMO) (2009). Information on the traffic separation scheme in the strait of Messina - SN 1 Circ/279, London.Google Scholar
International Maritime Organization (IMO). (2010). Degree of risk evaluation, SN. 1/Circ.296, London Google Scholar
Kaneko, F. (2002). Methods for probabilistic safety assessments of ships. Journal of Marine Science and Technology, 7(1), 1–16.Google Scholar
Karlson, M., Rasmussen, F. and Frisk, L. (1998). Verification of ship collision frequency model. In International Symposium on Advances in Ship Collision Analysis. Øresund, Denmark, 117–121.Google Scholar
Klemola, E., Kuronen, J., Kalli, J., Arola, T., Hanninen, M., Lehikoinen, A., Kuikka, S., Kujala, P. and Tapaninen, U. (2009). A cross-disciplinary approach to minimising the risks of maritime transport in the Gulf of Finland. World Review of Intermodal Transportation Research, 2(4), 343.Google Scholar
Kristiansen, S. (2005). Maritime Transportation: Safety Management and Risk Analysis, New York: Butterworth-Heinemann.Google Scholar
Kujala, P., Hänninen, T., Arola, T. and Ylitalo, J. (2009). Analysis of the marine traffic safety in the Gulf of Finland. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 94(8), 1349–1357.Google Scholar
Lee, J.K. (2007). Integrated Risk Model for the Management of Ship Safety. In First Workshop on Risk-Based Approaches in the Maritime Industry. Tokyo.Google Scholar
Li, S., Meng, Q. and Qu, X. (2012). An Overview of Maritime Waterway Quantitative Risk Assessment Models. Risk Analysis, 32(3), 496–512.Google Scholar
Li, S., Zhou, J. and Zhang, Y. (2015). Research of Vessel Traffic Safety in Ship Routeing Precautionary Areas Based on Navigational Traffic Conflict Technique. Journal of Navigation, 68(3), 589–601.Google Scholar
McDuff, T. (1978). The probability of vessel collisions. Ocean Industry, 9(9), 144–148.Google Scholar
Merrick, J.R., Van Dorp, J.R., Blackford, J.P., Shaw, G.L., Harrald, J. and Mazzuchi, T.A. (2003). A traffic density analysis of proposed ferry service expansion in San Francisco Bay using a maritime simulation model. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 81(2), 119–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meteo marine study. (2007). Port Master Plan of the Port of Messina. Annex D.1. Port Authority of Messina.Google Scholar
Montewka, J., Ehlers, S., Goerlandt, F., Hinz, T., Tabri, K. and Kujala, P. (2014). A framework for risk assessment for maritime transportation systems - A case study for open sea collisions involving RoPax vessels. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 124, 142–157.Google Scholar
Olsen, D., Gotfredsen, H.H. and Fujii, Y. (1992). Risk Reducing Effects of the Great Belt VTS System. In 7th International VTS Symposium. Canada.Google Scholar
Otto, S., Pedersen, P.T., Samuelides, M. and Sames, P.C. (2002). Elements of risk analysis for collision and grounding of a RoRo passenger ferry. Marine Structures, 15(4–5), 461–474.Google Scholar
Pedersen, P.T. (1995). Collision and grounding mechanics. In Proceedings of WEGEMT'95, The Danish Society of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers. Copenhagen, 125–157.Google Scholar
Pedersen, P.T., Hansen, P.F. and Nielsen, L.P. (1997). Probabilistic Analysis of Collision Damages with Application to ro-Ro Passenger Vessels. Identification of Collision Hazards. Annual Report, 89.Google Scholar
Silveira, P.A.M., Teixeira, A.P. and Soares, C.G. (2013). Use of AIS Data to Characterise Marine Traffic Patterns and Ship Collision Risk off the Coast of Portugal. Journal of Navigation, 66(6), 879–898.Google Scholar
Soares, C.G. and Teixeira, A.P. (2001). Risk assessment in maritime transportation. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 74(3), 299–309.Google Scholar
Trucco, P., Cagno, E., Ruggeri, F. and Grande, O. (2008). A Bayesian Belief Network modelling of organisational factors in risk analysis: A case study in maritime transportation. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 93(6), 845–856.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Uğurlu, Ö., Erol, S. and Başar, E. (2016). The analysis of life safety and economic loss in marine accidents occurring in the Turkish Straits. Maritime Policy & Management, 43(3), 356–370.Google Scholar
Vassalos, D., Oestvik, I. and Konovessis, D. (2000). Recent developments and application of a formalized design for safety methodology in an integrated environment. In Annual Meeting of the Society of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers. 419–445.Google Scholar
Vinnem, J.-E. (2014). Offshore Risk Assessment vol 2., London: Springer London.Google Scholar
Wang, J., Li, M., Liu, Y., Zhang, H., Zou, W. and Cheng, L. (2014). Safety assessment of shipping routes in the South China Sea based on the fuzzy analytic hierarchy process. Safety Science, 62, 46–57.Google Scholar
Weng, J., Meng, Q. and Qu, X. (2012). Vessel Collision Frequency Estimation in the Singapore Strait. The Journal of Navigation, 65, 207–221.Google Scholar
Van de Wiel, G. and Van Dorp, J.R. (2011). An oil outflow model for tanker collisions and groundings. Annals of Operations Research, 187(1), 279–304.Google Scholar
Wu, X., Mehta, A.L., Zaloom, V.A. and Craig, B.N. (2016). Analysis of waterway transportation in Southeast Texas waterway based on AIS data. Ocean Engineering, 121, 196–209.Google Scholar
Zhang, W., Goerlandt, F., Montewka, J. and Kujala, P. (2015). A method for detecting possible near miss ship collisions from AIS data. Ocean Engineering, 107, 60–69.Google Scholar
Zhang, W., Goerlandt, F., Kujala, P. and Wang, Y. (2016). An advanced method for detecting possible near miss ship collisions from AIS data. Ocean Engineering, 124, 141–156.Google Scholar