Bridge Alarms and other issues

Bridge Alarms, a useful tool for the watch keeper or an obstacle in case of emergency?

A modern bridge can be likened with the head of human body, where all nerves end and give alarming signals whenever this is necessary. Thus OOW can always be informed promptly on any malfunction of subsystems around the ship and take action accordingly. Alarms on bridge panels differ in type, audibility and location, but usually have common persistence in cases which the danger or malfunction that are designed to alert us for insist, regardless if we acknowledge the alarm on our panel. Obviously this occurs as a preference set by maker aiming to ensure that alarm is alerting us as long as the problem exists and persists; unfortunately this causes a new problem on a human personnel manned bridge. When a single alarm is activated accompanied by a visible one stating the nature of problem and while initially is accomplishing the purpose of alerting and activating us for the scope of danger or malfunction, eventually in the subsequent moments it becomes an obstructive source on our attempt to focus, concentrate and expectedly act to rectify the problem.

Regardless the source or nature of alarm-danger, the consistency in audible distraction for the OOW or Master while acting in Collision Avoidance or Maneuvering-Conning ship, acts as a disorientation factor while the one involved should be fully focused and clear minded. Of course all this ends by the time “Acknowledge” key is pressed and audible alarm becomes silent as the mission of the alarm has come to a temporary or final end, to inform and alert us for a danger malfunction or problem.

As stated previously, alarms differ as various makers are providing different devices equipping modern bridges. Different audible alarms have as benefit the ability for OOW of associating each different one with its own special device and location, saving time and concentration to search each time and identify the alarm location in each panel. The disadvantage in this pattern is that as various alarms may sound simultaneously, the bridge becomes a place full of noise that obviously is not an ideal environment for somebody who has to clearly act very fast and accurately, often without chance to rectify an initially made erroneous decision.

And if all those may be anticipated and dealt with on the experience and familiarity basis of common practice, what about when a serious incident occurs and the bridge environment has to be sound, calm and decisive while various complicated and difficult decisions have to be made under pressure and lack of time.

For anyone who has witnessed or even better participated in a modern bridge while in a case of a serious incident as a black out, a power failure, a flooding or fire onboard the experience as dramatic as it is by itself, turns to an even more shocking one as various alarms continuously hiss regardless the personnel’s attempts to acknowledge them. In such a case the purpose of installation and anticipated effect in proper bridge manning under which the alarms have been installed, turns to an additional difficulty factor that does not assist personnel in making proper decisions.

Science has shown that remaining concentrated and focused in pressing situations is difficult by itself due to human body and brain default reactions and capabilities, having a persistent distraction of repeating audible signals that have warned us once for a message which often cannot be solved in seconds, only increases our difficulty to think clear and decide promptly, actually in the most challenging and hazardous conditions, where everybody expects us to react at least perfectly.

Except the distraction caused by non stopping alarms in case of emergency, it also becomes hectic to listen an answer to VHF or telephone calls, even hear reports from various sources or broadcast orders. In a case of a passenger vessel full of sensors and alarming networks such a situation can only cause further problems rather than solving existing ones.

At last recently it was officially acknowledged (Danish Maritime Accident Investigation Board -Report on flooding in engine room of EMMA MAERSK in Suez Canal on February 1st 2013) that :

4.4 Disturbances by alarm systems

Throughout the entire course of events, the officers and crew were constantly disturbed and highly stressed by the sound of countless alarms, which made it extremely difficult to concentrate on the many challenges that appeared one after another. Even though the alarms were acknowledged continuously on the bridge and in the engine control room, it was not possible to keep up paying attention to the incoming alarms. Thus, it became necessary to concentrate on basic observations and to act manually accordingly.Because of the very high pace of incoming alarms and the distracting noise, there was a desire to be able to switch off the alarm sounders for the sake of effective communication and not being unduly stressed. But there was no such possibility. It takes manpower and concentration to operate and acknowledge alarms, and in this case the multiple alarms were a distraction more than an aid to officers and crew. It illustrates that the design feature of the monitoring and alarm systems that perform well in normal situations is not necessarily a help when handling a complex emergency situation – to some degree quite the contrary. Although it was not the case in these events, it may limit the crewmembers’ cognitive capabilities and the prioritizing necessary for handling an emergency situation. 

 The Proposal:

Alarms should be present and part of the Bridge layout but their allocation and handling should be controllable in order to assist rather than distract bridge personnel.

It should be of great benefit for the user that they all be located in a consolidated panel and grouped by type. Radar plots, ECDIS alarms AIS, GMDSS Navtex etc should all be able to be acknowledged in a central panel on the cockpit of an integrated bridge. After central acknowledgment user can enter the alarm menu in each device and be properly informed for the danger alarmed. Bilge alarms, Watertight Doors, Shell doors, Fire Detection and other relevant alarms to be centrally operated and acknowledged in a panel close to cockpit and similar ability to monitor and handle them to be possible.

Most important of all is that all audible alarms have to be accompanied by a visible one that usually can give more info of the problem. While acknowledged the audible alarm has to be kept silenced and only visible alarm signal to remain activated as an indication of danger that has not been eliminated while being dealt with.

VHF and relevant telecommunication devices, forgotten silent or deafeningly loud?

The continuous watch of Radio devices especially VHF is essential and vital on bridge watch and manning. While manual control of loudness is available and simultaneous watch in 2 or 3 different stations is required, there is always a possibility that messages can either not be heard due to low level set or distract when set in high volumes. As adjusting them constantly always contains danger to forget volume level low, it would be a benefit for users that all such devices may have an option that automatically maintains a normal volume level for bridge conditions, such that will ensure messages will be heard regardless how high or low is the device set up, or the loudness of transmitting station. Manual override option should be available for adjusting in special cases.

  Enclosed Bridges, should sealing of navigator be considered as protection benefit or isolating border from environment?

Discussion for enclosed bridges has been made already and considering trends in modern designs would tell that such concept has proven ideal. Benefit of protecting navigators from environmental extremes cannot be argued but why should the navigator be isolated from environment in not extreme cases that usually can be faced?

The ability to have easy access in surround area whenever this may be feasible or intended should be available for the navigator as the pros of such option remain important and considerable. There are designs that allow heavy bridge windows to be opened, though usually this is not practical –as of heavy constructions – and also one window semi opened as clam does not always provide desirable access. If designs incorporated more effective options as easily opened windows that can simultaneously allow access to environment out of enclosed bridge and easily operated systems, many users would welcome them and better contact between navigator and adjacent environment would result in better and safer handling, especially while maneuvering. Important element here should be that all controls in ship’s wings should be waterproofed so accidental rinses may not affect safe operation.

Associated article in gcaptain by Capt. G. Livingstone here: https://gcaptain.com/capt-george-livingstone-alarm-alarm-alarm/