2 JTP implementation

4 The maintenanceand operation ofdouble-hull tankers

6 Guidance on CAS

8 Ice-class tankers in Korea

I toVIII Shipbuilding in

China supplement

16 On the Horizon – the latest news

Exhibitions and technical papers

10 P&O Princess Cruise reconstruction

12 FOBAS in industry study

14 Learning from theISPS Code

Technical news and information for the marine industry

Horizons June 2004 Issue 8

Lloyd’s Register

Welcome to the eighth issue of

Lloyd’s Register’s marine-focused

technical publication, Horizons.

The international shipping industry

will soon descend on Piraeus to attend

the 19th Posidonia exhibition. The

Greek maritime fraternity remains a

strong and vital one at a time of great

change. New legislation continues to

impact the industry and, most

especially, those workhorses of the

sea, tankers and bulk carriers, both

ship types which are particularly well

represented in Greece.

The International Maritime

Organization recently met to decide

the fate of bulk carriers, and Lloyd’s

Register, the American Bureau of

Shipping and Det Norske Veritas are

on the verge of launching the IACS

Joint Tanker Project (JTP), a set of

common Rules for tankers of 150

metres and above which will change

not only the way that these ships are

built but also potentially the role of

class.

JTP is an unparalleled achievement

which will raise standards for new

construction and eliminate

competition on scantlings. Lloyd’s

Register looks forward to working

with shipowners, operators and

managers and shipyards, as well as

legislative bodies, to help to ensure

the swift and smooth implementation

of these new Rules.

We are ready to discuss this or any

other issue which impacts your

business; contact us or visit our stand

at Posidonia, where you are sure to

receive a warm welcome.

Alan Gavin

Marine Director

JTP implementation

Lloyd’s Register helps owners and yards to implement common tanker Rules

2 Horizons • June 2004

The JTP Rules will be reviewed bythe other members of theInternational Association ofClassification Societies (IACS) and,following a process of technicalharmonisation with the Joint BulkerProject, will form a key part of theIACS Common Rules Programme.

Over 50 technical staff have beenactively involved in JTP, and a totalof around $15 million has been spent by the three societies.Continuous industry input has beenprovided by an external reviewgroup, comprised of shipyardpersonnel, tanker operators andindependent consultants.

The Joint Tanker Project (JTP) has proved to be a majorundertaking. All sections of theJTP Rules have been developed,drafted, calibrated and tested injoint working groups, comprisedof staff from Lloyd’s Register, the American Bureau of Shipping(ABS) and Det Norske Veritas(DNV). The principal of jointworking has been paramount,with full and open sharing ofexpertise, experience andtechnology. This fully integratedapproach has been a major shift in culture in each society, but theresult has been an outstandingsuccess.

JTP will deliver to the industry a newset of classification Rules whichincorporate a new underlyingphilosophy of transparency and ease of application. Thepresentation of the Rules is now to be based throughout on a netscantling approach and will providegreater transparency by clearlydemonstrating the link betweenstructural capability and loadsapplied. The Rules will also providea direct link between newbuildingrequirements and the minimumthickness requirements in operation,which will allow the operator todetermine maintenance requirementsmore easily. The net scantlings arenow derived from an assessment ofglobal and local strength criteria. A corrosion margin – a wastagethickness plus a minimumcorrosion allowance – is then addedto arrive at the gross scantlings.

To make the design more durable,a 25-year design life has beenassumed, and the loads applied arederived from a North Atlantictrading environment. Directcalculation methods have beenharmonised between the threeclassification societies, such that thesame finite element modelling andloads are used and the sametechniques applied for fatigue andbuckling assessment. The Ruleswill be applied identically by eachsociety so that competition onscantlings is eliminated.

The IACS Joint Tanker Project team of Lloyd’s Register, ABS and DNV is set to deliver on

schedule a complete set of new Rules for oil tankers of length greater than or equal to 150

metres on January 1, 2005 and will shortly be delivering the draft set of Rules to the industry

for review and comment. Lloyd’s Register has put into place the knowledge and the

processes that will enable it to help shipowners and builders to implement the new Rules.

s and yards to t common tanker Rules

Horizons • June 2004 3

The Rules will ensure greaterrobustness and durability, payingparticular attention to corrosionmargins and fatigue. With proper,effective maintenance and goodoperational practices, the Ruleswill provide an owner with atanker that has a longer effectivelife before steel renewal or repairare required and the potential for agreater residual value.The benefits extend to theshipbuilder who will no longerhave to deal with several Rule sets.

Work continues Lloyd’s Register is currentlyworking with ABS and DNV on amajor programme of testing andcalibration to ensure that the newRules are consistent, coherent andcredible. Lloyd’s Register hasevaluated a large number of tankerdesigns using the new Rules, usingexperienced plan approval staff,and this work continues withvarious leading tanker builders ona range of standard designs. As aresult, a comprehensiveunderstanding of the implicationsof the new Rules on the scantlingsof typical oil tanker configurationshas been gained, and Lloyd’sRegister’s staff in its plan approvalcentres have acquired expertise inthe application of the new Rules.This transfer of knowledge andunderstanding from the Ruledevelopment team to the front linestaff to form a team of experts inthe key tanker building countries,who deliver advice and service toclients, is a critical element ofLloyd’s Register’s implementationof JTP.

“We recognise that industry, bothshipbuilders and shipowners, arefaced with an unfamiliar set ofRules and that they will need tounderstand the impact on theirbusiness,” says Vaughan Pomeroy,Lloyd’s Register’s Head of Researchand Development. “Lloyd’sRegister is well prepared, throughinvestment in training and activeinvolvement in the essential testingand calibration programme, todeliver high quality advice on thedesign of oil tankers to meet thenew Rule requirements.”

The complete new Rule set, togetherwith documents setting out in detail the technical background and the consequences ofimplementation, will be available to industry and the technicalcommittees of Lloyd’s Register in mid-June 2004. Full consultationwith industry remains a key elementof the development process.

Internal and external trainingAs well as establishing an expertnetwork to enable designers andbuilders to get to grips with thedetail of the application of the newRules, and their effects, Lloyd’sRegister has invested in creatingtraining courses for owners andbuilders and in training key staff in its local offices so that they canprovide clients with face-to-faceadvice and guidance. The trainingcourses have been compiled bysubject experts and have benefitedfrom the input of Lloyd’s Register’splan approval staff involved in the extended testing of the Rulesand their application to the manydifferent standard oil tankerdesigns which currently exist in the shipbuilding industry.

The courses cover issues such as thetechnical background to the Rules,prescriptive Rules and simplifiedfatigue and direct calculations. Theyinclude application of the Rules aswell as the software tools used toexpedite the process. The internaleducation process will help toensure that Lloyd’s Register is bestable to help its clients to understandand to implement the new Rules.

To help the industry to arrive at afuller understanding of the basis ofthe new Rules, Lloyd’s Register willbe delivering a series of technicalseminars for shipbuilders andshipowners in different parts of theworld over the coming months.

A frequently asked questions web pagefor the new tanker Rules can be found at: www.lr.org/newtankerrules

For further information contactGraham Marshall, Manager ofCommon Tanker RulesImplementation

Email: graham.marshall@lr.org Tel: +44 (0) 20 7423 1535Fax: +44 (0) 20 7423 2213

“Lloyd’s Register is wellprepared to deliver highquality advice on the designof oil tankers to meet thenew Rule requirements.”Vaughan Pomeroy, Lloyd’s Register’s Head of Research and Development

The industry has now had just over a decade of experience with double-hull tankers,

with the shift to an entirely double-hull fleet due to take place within the next 10

years. A study conducted by Lloyd’s Register shows that while some technical problems

remain, their solutions are becoming clearer.

Hull structureLloyd’s Register’s database ondamage to tanker structures wasanalysed over a ten-year period andpartitioned according to tanker sizeas follows:

• product tankers – 5,000 to 49,999 dwt

• panamax tankers – 50,000 to 79,999 dwt

• aframax tankers – 80,000 to 124,999 dwt

• suezmax tankers – 125,000 to 199,999 dwt

• VLCCs/ULCCs – over 200,000 dwt.

A sample of 373 ships having anaverage service life of 7.3 years wasexamined, with the results showingthat the three largest categories ofship have the least incidence ofdamage, averaging at around 47% ofthe total ships at risk. In the case ofproduct and panamax tankers, thisincidence statistic rose to about 71%.

Overall, three modes of failure were defined:

• those deriving from mechanicalloading, such as buckling or thesetting in of plating, frames orbulkheads

• those related to fracture orcracking, due to dynamic orperiodic loading, or to brittle orductile tearing

• those related to corrosion,erosion or excessive wastage ofstructural elements.

Mechanical loading was the primarycause of damage for all tanker sizeswith the exception of aframaxes, mostcommonly manifesting itself as side orbottom shell or longitudinal ortransverse bulkhead distortion. For the most part, when fractures orcracking occurred, they originatedfrom either low or high cycle fatigue,with the three largest tanker sizesappearing to suffer most from thistype of damage. In this instance,aframax tankers actually showed thegreatest incidence of failure. Currently,the study is being extended to fullyunderstand the reasons for this.

Excessive wastage and corrosion wasseen to affect panamax tankers at thehighest rate, with a 57% incidence, asignificantly higher percentage thanfor the other categories, which hadincidences lying between 5% and29%. It is known that these defectmodes are influenced by the methodof application and integrity ofcoatings, accessibility of certain areasof the ship for repair andmaintenance, cargo heating practicesand trade routes.

Machinery systemsIn recent years, shaft alignment hasbeen a major area of concern fortankers. The current solution to thisproblem combines relatively shortintermediate and tail shafts directlycoupled to the engine flywheel at theforward end, supported by anintermediate plummer bearing andpassed through and supported by theforward and after stern tube journalbearings at the aft end.

4 Horizons • June 2004

Double-hull tankers

A decade of double-hull tankers

While most participants in thesingle-hull versus double-hulldebate accept that a second hull isnot a panacea, it is acknowledgedthat it is an acceptable and cost-effective way of preventing oil spillsin certain types of tanker incidents,such as low energy groundings orcollisions. Concerns have beengrowing, however, as the industrysurpasses a decade of experiencewith double-hull tankers,particularly with respect tomaintenance and survey in the voidspace between the hulls.

Lloyd’s Register is closelymonitoring the situation andcontinues to advise owners andoperators that carefully conductedmaintenance is the best way ofpreventing incidents. A studyrecently conducted by Lloyd’sRegister based on a decade’s worthof data on aspects of modern tankerdesign showed that different sizes oftanker exhibit differing modes andlocations of failure and highlightedproblems related to achievingsatisfactory shaft alignment andpropulsion configurations.

Within the constraints ofcontemporary tanker design, thisarrangement makes for a very short,stiff shaft line arrangement. Two mainproblems present themselves: firstderiving a satisfactory alignmentthrough the stern tube bearings andsecondly, attaining an acceptable levelof shear forces and moments at thediesel engine coupling in order toachieve proper crankshaft alignment.

At the forward end, engine buildersprescribe envelopes of shear forcesand bending moments. The thermaldistortion of the engine also has to betaken into account, as well as theinternal reactions of the loads withinthe engine. A further factor to beconsidered is that shaft alignmentcalculations frequently do not takeaccount of hull deflection.

It has been commonly found withlarge tankers that when the ship’sdraught increases, one or both of thefollowing effects tend to occur: No. 2crankshaft bearing (from aft) has atendency to become unloaded or insome cases even top loaded, orexcessive hogging of the crank webdeflections of the No. 1 crank throwcan take place.

To overcome these problems, Lloyd’sRegister recommends a number ofactions. “It has been found thatsupporting the main engine bedplateat its four corners prior to chockingwill permit it to sag,” says JohnCarlton, Lloyd’s Register’s GlobalTechnology Leader for MarineTechnology and Investigations. “Afterchocking and when in service, thisdeliberately induced sag, typically onthe order of 0.2 to 0.4 mm, will bereduced by the thermal hoggingcharacteristics of the engine, inducedby the temperature difference betweenthe cylinder blocks and the crankcaseas it heats up to service conditions.

“Secondly, the builder might chooseto realign the engine with the ship inan operational ballast condition. Thiscould involve lowering the aft end ofthe engine by 3 to 5 mm and raisingthe forward end of the engine by asimilar amount,” says Carlton. “Thirdly, fitting eccentrically boredbearing shells of 0.3mm or less to theNos. 1, 2 and 3 bearings cansometimes be helpful.”

In the alternative case of aligning theshaft through the stern tube bearing,it has been found that design loadson the forward bearing have in someinstances been specified at as low as2 tonnes. Such values are surprising,since filling the ship’s aft peak tankcan reduce loading on this bearing bysome 5 tonnes. Consequently, theforward bearing design loading to beused in the setting of the alignmentshould be in the region of at least 10tonnes to avoid unforeseencircumstances which might unloadthis bearing.

Carlton further points out that shaftalignment procedures should becarefully undertaken. “The engineshould be aligned with the ship afloat,in a normal service ballast condition,”he says. “The main engine, prior tochocking, should be supported at itsfour corners to induce a bedplate sagand, while in this condition, the loadson Nos. 1 and 2 bearings should bebiased towards the No. 2 bearing. The alignment should then bechecked at full load draught with theengine hot. Lloyd’s Register alsoadvises that the static shaft alignmentbe rechecked some months after theship has entered service to ensure thatthe alignment hasn’t changed as aresult of structural ‘shakedown’.”

Horizons • June 2004 5

PropulsionResearch in the 1960s and early 1970sconcentrated on propellers in thepropulsion environment. At thattime, the wake field was a primaryconcern in balancing the after bodylines so that unpleasant cavitation,radiated hull surface pressure effectsand extreme U or V form hull shapeswould not be experienced.

There have been some instances inrecent years where the inflow intothe propeller disc has not been fullyoptimised. A particular cause ofconcern has been the after bodytransition from the full tanker bodyto the relatively slender form in wayof and immediately ahead of thepropeller station. If this transition isnot correctly made, flow separationin the vicinity of the top of thepropeller aperture can take place.When this occurs, very rapid changesof flow velocity can take place in theupper regions of the propeller disc.This may then manifest itself inunstable cavitation growth andcollapse, which not only encouragespremature propeller blade erosion,but also results in high radiated hullsurface pressures. “In light of theseeffects, flow characteristics shouldalways be thoroughly investigated atmodel scale,” cautions Carlton.

For further information contact John Carlton, Global TechnologyLeader for Marine Technology and Investigations

Email: john.carlton@lr.orgTel: +44 (0) 20 7423 1777Fax: +44 (0) 20 7423 1564

John Carlton, GlobalTechnology Leader forMarine Technology andInvestigations

Condition Assessment Scheme

Following the break-up and sinkingof the Prestige in November 2002, theEuropean Union (EU) introducedunilateral legislation whichaccelerated the phase-out of single-hull tankers and extended theapplication of the ConditionAssessment Scheme (CAS) toCategory 2 and 3 tankers. Thislegislation came into force onOctober 21, 2003 and prompted theInternational Maritime Organization(IMO), at an extra session of itsMarine Environment ProtectionCommittee, to adopt severalamendments to MARPOL 73/78Annex I regulation 13G, as well as anew regulation 13H andamendments to CAS, all of whichwill enter into force on April 5, 2005. The CAS requirements for Category2 and 3 tankers in both regulation

Navigating the CAS timetable

The IMO and EU regulations governing the phase-out of

single-hull tankers have yet to be harmonised, resulting in

confusion for owners who are looking to apply the Condition

Assessment Scheme to their tankers.

13G and the European phase-outlegislation are identical, but theirimplementation dates are not. Thishas been a major source of confusionfor owners who are perhaps alreadyunclear on how to go aboutapplying CAS to their tankers, orindeed, whether they should evenapply it at all (as opposed toscrapping the tonnage altogether).

Making matters worse, when anowner does opt for CAS, he is facedwith the technical andadministrative challenges associatedwith the process. CAS is renownedfor its long lead times, with theregulations requiring that an ownernotify his flag state administrationeight months in advance of the CASsurvey taking place. The fact that theIMO and EU implementation dates

are out of sync only serves tointensify the confusion surroundingthe CAS procedures, especially forthose owners planning special orintermediate surveys anddrydockings in 2004-2007.

The problem lies in the relevantwording and ‘start dates’ for the EUand MARPOL regulations. The EUlegislation requires a CAS surveyfor a Category 2 or 3 tanker at theintermediate or special survey beforethe anniversary of date of buildingfor ships of 15 years or older in2005. MARPOL regulation 13G,however, requires CAS surveys forCategory 2 and 3 tankers at the nextintermediate or special survey fortankers of 15 years and older.

Hypothetical casesBelow are three hypothetical caseswhich clearly highlight thedifficulties presented by the currenttimelines required by the EUregulations and regulation 13G.

Ship delivered in May 1990, i.e.anniversary after April 5, 2005 (seediagram 1)On the face of it, it appears that theowner of this ship has no problem.CAS will be required at the thirdspecial survey, due on theanniversary of the ship. However, theclass window for this special surveyfalls between the fourth annualsurvey and the third special survey.An owner intending to make use ofthis window by commencing surveysearly might be looking to have someballast and/or cargo tanks creditednow (May-June 2004). However, theregulations state that the CASplanning process must begin eightmonths before the surveyscommence, which would mean thatthis owner would have had to notifyhis flag state administration in thesummer of 2003.

6 Horizons • June 2004

2004 2005MARPOL 13g5/4/05

Anniversary (15yrs)and SS(III) -CAS for EU/13G

SS(III) -CAS for EU

ITMS - CAS for 13G

ITMS - CAS for 13G only

Diagram 1 - Ship built 1990 after 5th April (i.e. May)

SurveyCAS planningSurvey window

Diagram 2 - Ship built 1990 before 5th April (i.e. Jan)

Diagram 3 - Ship built 1989 (i.e. May)

Anniversary (16yrs)and AS - no CAS

Anniversary (15yrs)and SS(III) -CAS for EU only

CAS reportdeadline

CAS reportdeadline

EU regs21/10/03

AS

2006 2007

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

2008 20092004 2005 2006 2007

AS

AS

AS ASASAS

AS AS AS

Conversely, this means that anowner who is just beginning toapply to flag to plan CAS surveyswill have to wait until February2005 for the surveys to begin. Thisis uncomfortably close to the specialsurvey anniversary, especiallyconsidering that the regulationsstipulate that the final reports mustbe submitted two months prior tothe anniversary date, to ensuresufficient time for processing andcertificate production.

Ship built in January 1990, i.e.anniversary before April 5, 2005(see diagram 2)In the case of a ship built in early1990, the owner is faced with achoice of carrying out CAS with thethird special survey in 2005 in orderto comply with the EU regulation orin 2007-2008 in order to complywith regulation 13G. Sinceenhanced survey programme (ESP)requirements are now being raisedto CAS levels, it would be wise forowners to satisfy all therequirements of CAS. However, thiscould be tricky, as the final reportsmust be submitted two monthsprior to the deadline. Allowing twoto three months for all surveys,thickness measurement compilationand review and class and CASreporting, as well as factoring in theeight-month planning period, thisowner would have had to apply tohis flag state administration inJanuary or February of this year.

Ship built mid-1989 (see diagram 3)By way of a last example, considera ship which will not beundergoing its intermediate orspecial survey in 2005. In this case,the EU regulation requires CAS tobe held at the preceding specialsurvey. Regulation 13G, meanwhile,allows CAS surveys at the nextintermediate survey, resulting in a

difference of up to three years, notto mention considerable costdifferences, as a CAS survey heldnow, before the new class ESPregulations enter force, will beconsiderably more onerous thancurrent third special survey levels.

Of course, for any CAS surveysrequired this year, the planningdeadline is by now long past. Thisimplies that EU-flagged ships, iftrading to Europe, will fail tocomply with their own regulationsunless the CAS surveys are carriedout separately from the requiredintermediate and special surveys. Itis also possible that non-EU flaggedships will be banned fromEuropean offshore terminals, portsand anchorages unless their ownerstake similar measures.

Harmonisation on the way?In view of the missed CAS surveysand planning deadlines which arenow practically built into theprocess due to the differencesbetween the EU and regulation 13Gimplementation timetables, theindustry is looking to flag statesand IMO to take a lead.

The Lloyd’s Register Group(Lloyd’s Register) has issuedextensive guidance to ownersregarding CAS and the timelinesinvolved and is prepared to helpany owner wishing to implementthe Scheme.

“In our experience, owners ofsingle-hull tankers who haveapplied for exemption from theplanning timelines have been forthe most part successful,” says SamJames, Lloyd’s Register’s MARPOLCo-ordinator. “We can’t assume thatthis will always be the case, butthere are some who believe that theEU will fall into line with the IMO

e

Horizons • June 2004 7

MARPOL regulations.” Along theselines, James points out that Malta,for one, has already adopted theIMO timetable for CAS.

“Lloyd’s Register is ready to adviseowners on the most efficient andeffective way to go aboutimplementing CAS, should theyrequire it, and recommends thatowners of affected tonnage contacttheir flag state administrations andclassification societies at the earliestopportunity to discuss the options.”

For further information contact Sam James, Principal Surveyor andMARPOL Co-ordinator

Email: sam.james@lr.orgTel: +44 (0) 20 7423 2683Fax: +44 (0) 20 7423 2060

Owners who are looking toschedule CAS surveys over thenext three years will have tonavigate a complicatedtimetable.

CAP, not CASNot to be confused with CAS, the Condition Assessment

Programme (CAP) offered by Lloyd’s Register remains a key

part of the vetting process of shipowners and charterers.

“CAP remains a requirement for the owner of quality older

tonnage making the commercial decision to seek business

with the oil majors,” says Graeme Blevins, Lloyd’s Register’s

Head of Condition Assessment Services. “Only a CAP report

distinguishes and rates a ship’s structural and operational

quality over and above class and CAS standards, to the

satisfaction of the market.”

Lloyd’s Register has worked to integrate CAP with statutory

and class surveys, which means that Lloyd’s Register CAP

surveys are easy to plan and schedule and are equivalent in

extent to CAS and class ESP hull surveys.

Blevins sounds a cautionary note, however. “Even when

MARPOL regulation 13G CAS surveys fall due as late as

2007 or 2008, owners of tankers of 15 years of age and

older, this year or next, should remember that CAP surveys

will still need to be scheduled. Whether IMO and the EU

will harmonise their implementation dates for CAS is up for

debate, but it will remain a certainty that charterers will be

looking for CAP.”

When it comes to building ships inKorea, size clearly matters. The largest container ships in theworld, a series of 9,600 teucontainer ships for Seaspan andChina Shipping Group, are to be built at Samsung HeavyIndustries, while DaewooShipbuilding and MarineEngineering, along with other LNGbuilders, is looking into thepossibility of 200,000 and 225,000cu m LNG carrier designs. Ice-strengthened tankers are noexception. The latest string ofaframax and even suezmax tankerorders at Korean yards representthe largest ice-strengthened tankersto be built to date.

The majority of these tankers arebeing built to the Finnish-SwedishIce Class Rules, and most usually tothe Finnish-Swedish Ice Class 1A.This type of tanker is suitable foroperation in first-year icethicknesses of up to 0.8 metres andhas enough propulsive power toensure 5 knots ahead speed in a‘brash ice’ fairway channel with an ice thickness of up to 1.0 metres.In practice, an Ice Class 1A vesselwill be able to operate year roundin the northern Baltic, in all but themost severe ice conditions that canbe expected.

“Most of the ice-strengthenedaframax and suezmax orders inKorea are specification upgrades,either of existing orders or ofoptions,” says Rob Tustin, Lloyd’sRegister Asia’s Head of Busan PlanApproval Services. “As a result ofthe developments in the Russianoil export market, owners areseeking the flexibility of being ableto operate in those waters whereice strengthening or ice classes willbe required. Although this tonnagecosts more than ‘normal’ tonnage,the costs of the extra steel and thespecification upgrade are provingto be viable in the context of future earnings.”

Typically, these tankers are beingbuilt with conventional layouts anda single-screw, aft engine room.The hull forms are being optimisedfor open water performance, ratherthan exhibiting ice design, a furtherindicator of the ‘speculative’ nature

Ice-class tankers in Korea

Building bigger ice-strengthened tankers

8 Horizons • June 2004

of the ordering currently takingplace. Design ambienttemperatures and special operatingarrangements are being proposedfor deck outfitting and equipmentfor low temperature operations.These ships also have a greaterinstalled engine power, with anadditional cylinder typically beingspecified on the main engine forthe highest ice class, i.e. theFinnish-Swedish Ice Class 1AS.

Teekay, BP Shipping, Essberger andMarmaras are just a few of theowners who have placed orders forlarge ice-class tankers or upgradedexisting orders in Korean yards toLloyd’s Register class.

Technical challengesThere are inherent technicalchallenges in building tankers ofthese sizes to the Finnish-SwedishRules, as they were based onformulations designed for smallertankers. Two of the most prevalentchallenges have been thoseassociated with frame spacings and propulsion.

Lloyd’s Register Asia worked withthe Finnish Maritime Administration(FMA) to apply its “Tentativeguidelines for application of direct calculation methods forlongitudinally framed hullstructure”, which employcomparative non-linear finiteelement analyses for side shellstructure under ice-pressure loading.

continued on page 9 >

Like all other ship types, ice-strengthened tankers continue to increase in size as

owners pursue economies of scale and the flexibility to take advantage of future

market requirements. The Lloyd’s Register Group has been deeply involved in finding

solutions to the technical challenges that have arisen along the way.

Yards are carrying out ice model tests at special facilities in orderto determine the propulsion requirements of larger ice-strengthened tankers.

Shipbuilding in China • Horizons • June 2004 I

China is confidently striding onto the world

shipbuilding stage, ready to play a leading role. The

country continues to expand the range of its

capabilities in all ship sectors and to add new capacity.

Many foreign owners have taken advantage of the

prices and flexibility that Chinese yards offer, with the

generally positive reports from owners who have built

in China allowing the country to gradually widen its

international client base.

The continuously improving reputation for quality is

also driving a steady expansion of market share. With

4.1 million dwt of completions in 2003, China was

responsible for 8% of the global total construction of

51.7 million dwt. In the same year, China captured 14.4

million dwt out of the total global orders of 102.3

million dwt, which means that mainland yards signed a

full 14% of the contracts placed by international

shipowners last year.

Growth driversThe story behind the statistics is rooted in the first

wave of capacity expansions which took place between

1998 and 2004, during which time China opened no

fewer than 10 large drydocks. This rapid rate of

expansion is set to continue, with China aiming to up

its output from the 4.3 million dwt it achieved in 2003

to 10 million dwt in 2005 and 24 million dwt in 2015.

The growth in Chinese output

has been helped along by

investment in new capacity and

facilities. Shanghai Waigaoqiao

and New Century shipyards

recently opened new drydocks,

while Dalian New and Hudong-

Zhonghua have increased the

number or size of their

drydocks.

Commercial factors such as the

scarcity of berths over the next

three years in traditional

shipbuilding countries such

as Korea and Japan are

contributing to the growth of China, as is the Chinese

government, which has shown full support for the

domestic shipbuilding industry.

The government department responsible for the sector,

the National Development and Reform Commission, is

drafting a range of policies that will include

preferential business income taxes, investment

incentives for foreign suppliers and financial backing.

Besides these incentives, the commission is also

promising “key support to the shipbuilding industry” in

the country’s eleventh ‘Five-Year Plan’, running from

2006 to 2010.

Capacity upgradesThe next stage of capacity upgrades promises to be

dramatic. China State Shipbuilding Corp (CSSC) has just

broken ground in Shanghai on what it claims will be

the world’s largest shipyard when completed in 2015.

The yard, which will cost $3.6 billion to build, is

expected to have an annual shipbuilding capacity of

around 12 million dwt by 2015.

continued overleaf >

New construction in ChinaChina, the driver of this year’s buoyant freight market, is already on its way to

becoming a major player in the shipbuilding industry. In this special eight-page

supplement, Lloyd’s Register reports on its experiences in the burgeoning

shipbuilding nation.

“It will be the largest shipyard in the world, and it

will also help CSSC become the world’s top

shipbuilder,” CSSC general manager Chen Xiaojin

says, explaining that the yard will quadruple CSSC’s

existing capacity of 3 million dwt annually. Steel

cutting on the first ships will start by 2008, and CSSC

will move its two existing yards in Shanghai -

Jiangnan Shipyard and Hudong-Zhonghua

Shipbuilding - to the new site by 2010.

CSSC has also announced plans for a shipyard in

deep waters near Guangzhou on the island of

Longxue. The proposed $700 million shipyard will

have two VLCC docks

with a capacity of

2 to 3 million dwt per

year, a substantial

expansion when

compared to the

400,000 dwt annual

capacity at

Guangzhou

International

Shipyard, which is

currently the largest

yard in South China.

The exact timeline for

opening Longxue is

still not fixed, but the

general plan is to

complete the first

ship by the end of

2008 at the latest.

These government-controlled yards are not alone in

their rush to expand. Provincial yards, particularly in

the Yangtze River Basin, are also moving ahead with

new facilities. Private investors are stepping in to take

major shareholding positions in smaller yards,

determined to take them into the top ranks of the

international builders. Another important trend is that

foreign shipbuilders are also clearly intending to

position themselves in the Chinese market by either

building their own facilities or taking equity stakes in

existing yards.

II Shipbuilding in China • Horizons • June 2004

Ship sectors and typesChina is beginning to exhibit expertise across a wide

range of ship types and sizes. Some of the more recently

upgraded yards are targeting the dry bulk sector,

attempting to capitalise on the main ship type that

China’s yards built when they entered the export market

in the mid-1990s. Today, the country holds a good market

share in all sizes from handysize to capesize.

There has also been substantial progress in the tanker

sector. In 2003, China completed 1.9 million dwt worth of

tankers, which meant that it had a 6% share of global

completions in the tanker sector. Of the new tanker orders

placed in 2003, China won 6.1 million dwt or 13% of the

46.2 million dwt worth of contracts completed globally.

Chinese yards have successfully built a range of tanker

sizes from handymax to VLCC. After winning aframax

and suezmax export orders in the late 1990s, Chinese

yards continue to build these sizes as well as VLCCs for

overseas clients. In fact, in 2003, four of the 37 VLCCs

built globally were built in China, at Dalian New and

Nantong. A range of yards are also responding to the

market’s demand for handymax and panamax tankers

to replace tonnage that will be phased out under

tougher international rules on single hulls.

In the container ship sector, a wide range of mainland yards

are building feederships, and China seems poised to enter

the arena for larger container ships. China Shipping has

placed orders for an extensive series of panamax and post-

panamax ships at domestic yards and the foreign orders for

the panamax bracket have already arrived, in the form of a

series of four 4,250 teu ships for German owner Rickmers

Reederi GmbH & Cie, with an option for a further four, and

two 4,250 teu ships for Pacific International Lines of

Singapore at Dalian New, all to Lloyd’s Register class.

China has also been tackling the challenges of export

passenger and ro-ro ship construction in the form of the

Gotland ro-pax ships built at Guangzhou and the Stena

ro-ros built at Dalian.

China is probably several years away from an export

LNG order, but it has won its first membrane contracts

for construction at Hudong-Zhonghua, and the Chinese

shipbuilding industry is also poised to build Moss-type

LNG ships.

Shipbuilding in China • Horizons • June 2004 III

Lloyd’s Register Asia works with Chinese designer and yard

on new bulk carrier design

Victoria Steamship stepped across the crucial capacity

threshold to the B-60 designation when it adopted and

modified a design from the Shanghai Merchant Ship

Design and Research Institute (SDARI) which was originally

designated as a ‘B’ freeboard ship. Discussions with both

SDARI and Lloyd’s Register Asia paved the way toward an

upgrade which improved carrying capacity by adding a

poop deck and adjusting the hold lengths to minimise

deck immersion in the event of flooding of the holds and

adjacent tanks.

The double-side skin of the design was also modified to

meet the International Maritime Organization’s minimum

clear access width requirements and was further upgraded

to meet IACS Unified Requirement (UR) S25 which requires

strengthening for high density cargoes. The ship is fully

compliant with URs S26 and S27 regarding foredeck

fittings and securing.

The B-60 designation is a striking achievement considering

that only panamaxes and capesizes qualify under the 1966

Load Line Convention, as a result of their greater number

of holds and their shorter hold lengths (25 to 26 metres). A

handymax, with hold lengths of 29 to 30 metres, has a

more severe problem if its forward

hold becomes flooded, as this hold

is bigger in relative scale than that

of a panamax or a capesize. In

addition, a handymax has fewer

non-flooded holds to provide

buoyancy.

“The constructive involvement of

Lloyd’s Register Asia at all stages

was paramount in developing a

marketable ship,” says Spiros

Contopoulos, Technical Director of

Victoria Steamship. “Lloyd’s Register

Asia provided us with its knowledge

and experience in overcoming a

number of obstacles.”

Contopoulos also credited SDARI with being very “co-

operative and helpful in developing a good and

commercially successful design”. He adds that his company

hopes to work with SDARI and Lloyd’s Register Asia in the

future to develop a new generation of panamax double-

side skin vessels.

The design has been adopted for six ships for Victoria

Steamship and two for Hallecousis at New Century,

while Pacific Basin has ordered two of the ships from

Xiamen Shipyard.

These ships are emblematic of New Century’s focus on bulk

carriers and tankers of up to panamax size. Working from

two drydocks, the yard is capable

of building nine panamaxes a year

and intends to increase output to

16 vessels by 2007.

Liu Haijin, Head of Business at

New Century reveals that the

yard would like to build a third

drydock capable of building four

capesizes simultaneously.

“Realisation of this expansion

plan is subject to the market and

availability of investors,” says

Liu, adding that in the mean time

the yard will continue to

concentrate on panamax product

tankers and bulkers.

Victoria Steamship worked with Lloyd’s Register Asia and SDARI to maximise the cargocarrying capacity of its bulk carriers.

New Century facilities• One building dock, 250 metres in

length x 74 metres in width, 1 x 400

ton gantry crane

• One building dock, 360 metres in

length x 76 metres in width, 2 x 600

ton gantry cranes

• Tribon 3D software for production

drawings

• total 1,500 metre outfitting jetty

with 4 x 30 ton cranes, 12 vessels of

up to panamax size can be

accommodated simultaneously for

outfitting after launching

• plan to invest in a third drydock of a

dimension capable of accomodating

four capesize bulk carriers.

A Chinese handymax design has been

modified to achieve a much sought after

‘B-60’ load-line designation that

dramatically maximises cargo carrying

capacity, bringing the deadweight tonnage

up to 56,000 dwt.

Yard Name: Affiliation Main newbuilding facilities Expansion plans Largest ship built to date Largest ship on orderbook Types of ships on order Extra comments

Dalian New CSIC drydock 540 m x 80 m, slipway 306 m x 50 m (170,000 dwt), slipway VLCC VLCC VLCCs, aframax and panamax tankers, 4,350 recently expanded drydock

200 m x 76.4 m (50,000 dwt) teu and 5,668 teu container ships

Dalian CSIC three slipways 199 m x 23.5 m (12,000 dwt), 255 m x 29 m (40,000 dwt), 72,000 dwt tanker 110,000 dwt tanker 45,000 dwt IMO type 3 panamax tankers, first drydock opened early 2004

290 m x 35.5 m (80,000 dwt), one drydock 400 m x 96 m (500,000 dwt) aframax tankers

Bohai Shipyard CSIC 260 m x 50 m drydock (150,000 dwt) larger drydock planned 159,000 dwt tanker 174,000 dwt bulk carrier handymax, suezmax, capesize bulk carriers

Shanhaiguan CSIC one 300,000 dwt repair drydock (340 x 64 x 12.8); one 60,000 dwt repair add new gantry to develop 30,000 ton lift capacity barge 30,000 dwt handysize handysize bulk carrier primarily repair yard

drydock (240 x 39 x 11.4) and one 15,000 dwt repair drydock(170 x 28 x 9.1) new construction abilities

Xingang CSIC one 35,000 dwt (263 m) slipway, one 15,000 dwt (197 m) slipway 34,300 dwt bulk carrier 37,600 dwt bulk carrier handysize bulk carrier

Yantai Raffles 90% foreign owned 120 m x 430 m drydock 6,500 dwt cement carrier, 400,000 barrel FSO 2,300 dwt offshore support vessel offshore tugs world's widest drydock

Hudong-Zhonghua CSSC 380 m x 92 m drydock, five slipways for 20,000 to 105,000 dwt ships will move to Changxing Island 5,618 teu container ship 145,000m3 LNG handymax bulk carrier, 4,250 teu and 5,618 teu merged with Zhonghua in 2002

Shipbuilding container ships, 145,000m3 LNG

Jiangnan Shipyard CSSC two slipways of 240 m x 24 m (35,000 dwt) and 275 m x 40 m (80,000 dwt), will move to Changxing Island 74,000 dwt bulk carrier 74,000 dwt bulk carrier panamax ships, LPG tankers, small

two drydocks of 232 m x 37.5 m (80,000 dwt) and 187.5 m x 30.2 m (25,000 dwt) ro-ro passenger ships

Shanghai Shipyard CSSC 46 m x 300 m slipway, one 40,000 dwt and one 100,000 dwt floating dock 110 m x 500 m and 90 x 50,000 dwt bulk carrier 3,500 teu container ships handy and handymax bulk carriers, 30,000 dwt new docks opening in 2008

(Chongming Island site) 450 m berths bulk carriers, 3,500 teu container ships

Shanghai Waigaoqiao CSSC two drydocks, 480 m x 106 m, 360 m x 76 m will add new gantry cranes 175,000 dwt bulk carrier 175,000 dwt bulk carrier capesize bulk carriers and aframax tankers delivered first ship in 2003

Shanghai Edward CSSC (Hudong) slipway, 20,000 dwt 17,500 dwt bulk carrier 25,000 dwt chemical tanker chemical tankers and bulk carriers

Nantong Cosco KHI Ship COSCO/KAWASAKI 300,000 dwt (350 m) drydock VLCC VLCC (298,350 dwt) VLCCs, 5,000 unit car carriers, opened in 1999

Engineering (NACKS) handymax bulk carriers

New Century (Group) independent 360 m x 76 m drydock, 215 m x 63 m step-type drydock 52,300 dwt bulk carrier 73,400 dwt tanker handy to handymax bulk carriers, panamax tankers new dock opened in 2001

Shipyard

Jinling Shipyard China Chanjiang 220 m x 68 m (up to 55,000 dwt) new drydock for four capesizes 25,000 dwt chemical tanker 37,300 dwt chemical tanker 14,500 dwt to 37,300 dwt chemical tankers,

National Shipping Group ro-ros, 30,000 dwt heavylift ships, container ships

Jiangdu Yahai (formerly independent 260 m x 39.5 m drydock new facility planned 32,000 dwt bulk carrier 80,000 dwt bulk carrier handymax tankers, handy to panamax

Jiangdu Yuehai) bulk carriers

Jingjiang Traffic independent 190 m x 52 m semi-dock slipway (30,000 dwt) and longitudinal slipway 519 teu container ship 80,000 dwt bulk carrier 12,000 dwt container ships and 7,600 dwt

(ex-Jinjiang Sumec) (190 m x 33 m) for 20,000 dwt, one 260 m x 61 m slipway for general cargo ships

80,000 dwt and one 200 m x32 m for 20,000 dwt

Dayang (ex-Jiangyang independent two drydocks, 350 m x 60 m, 250 m x 30 m 1,300 teu container ship 53,800 dwt bulk carrier 47,000 dwt to 53,800 dwt handymax bulk carriers, restarted under new management

Shipbuilding) 13,500 dwt chemical tanker

Jiangsu Yangzijiang independent three slipways, 220 m x 42 m, 190 m x 32 m, 140 m x 24 m 25,500 dwt bulk carrier 1,850 teu container ship container ships up to 1,850 teu

Chengxi Shipyard CSSC 310 m x 39 m slipway 25,000 dwt chemical tanker 53,000 dwt bulk carrier 53,000 dwt double-hull handymax bulk carriers switching from repair to newbuilding

Qingshan Shipyard China Chanjiang 10 horizontal berths up to 20,000 dwt 9,500 dwt multi-purpose carrier 18,500 dwt chemical tanker 3,000 dwt to 18,500 dwt chemical tankers, China's only maker of stainless

National Shipping Group 9,500 dwt multi-purpose carrier, small container ships steel chemical carriers

Wuhu CSSC 189.7 m x 25 m drydock 27,000 dwt handysize 27,000 handysize, offshore

Kouan Shipyard independent three slipways, maximum up to 50,000 dwt 25,000 dwt multi-purpose carrier 53,800 dwt bulk carrier small container ships, 10,000 dwt to 53,800 dwt

bulk carriers

Guangzhou Shipyard CSSC three slipways, maximum up to 50,000 dwt new facility at Longxue Island 40,000 dwt tanker 40,000 dwt tanker 29,000 to 40,000 dwt tankers yard has built sophisticated ships, but

International entire orderbook focused on tankers

Guangzhou Wenchong CSSC one 25,000 dwt drydock, one 25,000 dwt slipway new facility at Longxue Island 20,000 dwt multi-purpose carrier 1,700 teu container ship 27-type (27,000 dwt) bulk carriers and 1,700 teu primarily repair yard with

container ships 200,000 dwt drydock and also

building eight ships per year

Xiamen Shipbuilding Fujian Province one 55,000 dwt slipway plans to extend slipway from 195 m 30,000 dwt multi-purpose carrier 56,000 dwt bulk carrier optimised handymax design,

Heavy Industry to 235 m for panamax capacity 12,000 dwt car carriers, multi-purpose ships

Zhejiang Shipyard Zhejiang Shipyard 198 m x 34 m slipway 51,000 dwt bulk carrier 53,000 dwt bulk carrier, handymax bulk carriers

container ships

Fujian Mawei Fujian Province 35,000 dwt drydock, 20,000 dwt slipway, 15,000 dwt slipway 17,600 multi-purpose carrier 53,100 dwt bulk carrier handymax bulk carriers and 17,600 dwt

Shipbuilding Ltd. multi-purpose carrier

IV Shipbuilding in China • Horizons • June 2004

Yards capable of building ships of greater than 20,000 dwt

Nor

thSh

angh

aiYa

ngts

e Ri

ver

Sout

h

Shipbuilding in China • Horizons • June 2004 V

Largest ship built to date Largest ship on orderbook Types of ships on order Extra comments

VLCC VLCC VLCCs, aframax and panamax tankers, 4,350 recently expanded drydock

teu and 5,668 teu container ships

72,000 dwt tanker 110,000 dwt tanker 45,000 dwt IMO type 3 panamax tankers, first drydock opened early 2004

aframax tankers

159,000 dwt tanker 174,000 dwt bulk carrier handymax, suezmax, capesize bulk carriers

30,000 ton lift capacity barge 30,000 dwt handysize handysize bulk carrier primarily repair yard

34,300 dwt bulk carrier 37,600 dwt bulk carrier handysize bulk carrier

6,500 dwt cement carrier, 400,000 barrel FSO 2,300 dwt offshore support vessel offshore tugs world's widest drydock

5,618 teu container ship 145,000m3 LNG handymax bulk carrier, 4,250 teu and 5,618 teu merged with Zhonghua in 2002

container ships, 145,000m3 LNG

74,000 dwt bulk carrier 74,000 dwt bulk carrier panamax ships, LPG tankers, small

ro-ro passenger ships

50,000 dwt bulk carrier 3,500 teu container ships handy and handymax bulk carriers, 30,000 dwt new docks opening in 2008

bulk carriers, 3,500 teu container ships

175,000 dwt bulk carrier 175,000 dwt bulk carrier capesize bulk carriers and aframax tankers delivered first ship in 2003

17,500 dwt bulk carrier 25,000 dwt chemical tanker chemical tankers and bulk carriers

VLCC VLCC (298,350 dwt) VLCCs, 5,000 unit car carriers, opened in 1999

handymax bulk carriers

52,300 dwt bulk carrier 73,400 dwt tanker handy to handymax bulk carriers, panamax tankers new dock opened in 2001

25,000 dwt chemical tanker 37,300 dwt chemical tanker 14,500 dwt to 37,300 dwt chemical tankers,

ro-ros, 30,000 dwt heavylift ships, container ships

32,000 dwt bulk carrier 80,000 dwt bulk carrier handymax tankers, handy to panamax

bulk carriers

519 teu container ship 80,000 dwt bulk carrier 12,000 dwt container ships and 7,600 dwt

general cargo ships

1,300 teu container ship 53,800 dwt bulk carrier 47,000 dwt to 53,800 dwt handymax bulk carriers, restarted under new management

13,500 dwt chemical tanker

25,500 dwt bulk carrier 1,850 teu container ship container ships up to 1,850 teu

25,000 dwt chemical tanker 53,000 dwt bulk carrier 53,000 dwt double-hull handymax bulk carriers switching from repair to newbuilding

9,500 dwt multi-purpose carrier 18,500 dwt chemical tanker 3,000 dwt to 18,500 dwt chemical tankers, China's only maker of stainless

9,500 dwt multi-purpose carrier, small container ships steel chemical carriers

27,000 dwt handysize 27,000 handysize, offshore

25,000 dwt multi-purpose carrier 53,800 dwt bulk carrier small container ships, 10,000 dwt to 53,800 dwt

bulk carriers

40,000 dwt tanker 40,000 dwt tanker 29,000 to 40,000 dwt tankers yard has built sophisticated ships, but

entire orderbook focused on tankers

20,000 dwt multi-purpose carrier 1,700 teu container ship 27-type (27,000 dwt) bulk carriers and 1,700 teu primarily repair yard with

container ships 200,000 dwt drydock and also

building eight ships per year

m 30,000 dwt multi-purpose carrier 56,000 dwt bulk carrier optimised handymax design,

12,000 dwt car carriers, multi-purpose ships

51,000 dwt bulk carrier 53,000 dwt bulk carrier, handymax bulk carriers

container ships

17,600 multi-purpose carrier 53,100 dwt bulk carrier handymax bulk carriers and 17,600 dwt

multi-purpose carrier

f greater than 20,000 dwt

Dalian New’s aframax design, developed in

co-operation with Greek shipowner and

manager Thenamaris, has found favour

among many yards and owners.

One of the most successful vessels in China is the

Dalian New Shipbuilding and Heavy Industries (Dalian

New) aframax.

The ship was first developed in 1995 with Lloyd’s

Register Asia involvement in the pre-approval process.

To date there have been 12 deliveries, mostly to Lloyd’s

Register class, with another 18 ships on order, including

16 for A P Møller and six for Torm.

The first orders placed were the trio of Thenamaris

105,000 dwt aframax product tankers delivered in

1998-1999 as the first Greek newbuilding projects ever

carried out in China.

Thenamaris has been engaged in the tanker sector for

29 years, but only became involved with newbuildings

in 1995. According to Dean Tseretopoulos, Technical

Director at Thenamaris, the company had amassed a

wealth of experience with its fleet of 33 ships – all

bought secondhand – which it was able to bring to

bear on the newbuilding process. The company was

able to incorporate its ideas of what constituted a

“better tanker” in the series of three 105,000 dwt

aframax product tankers it ordered from Dalian New.

These so-called Dalian New ‘Easy Clean’ ships were

designed to an in-house concept

that Thenamaris developed in co-

operation with the shipyard and

Lloyd’s Register Asia.

The smooth tank design, with

stiffeners and frames on deck, is

common to chemical tankers, but

not crude oil tankers. The design

reduces corrosion by allowing

easy boundary drainage and

cleaning. Both transverse

bulkhead corrugations and

centreline longitudinal bulkhead

corrugations were designed with a flange angle such

that cleaning could be maximised with the tank

cleaning guns. The design allows easy conversion from

a crude oil tanker to a clean products tanker. The ship

was also ice-strengthened to Finnish-Swedish Ice Class

1D and had thruster units.

The design was later approved by other classification

societies. “Lloyd’s Register Asia has worked with us for

many years on these aframaxes, and now we also have

a fluid co-operation on our 4,250 teu container ships

and our VLCCs,” says Richard Hu, Director and Senior

Engineer at Dalian New.

When it ordered back in 1996, Thenamaris was attracted

to Dalian New’s credentials as one of the few Chinese

yards to have experience of building larger tankers. A P

Møller followed in ordering four ships in 1997 for

delivery between 1999 and 2000. The extensive foreign

ordering of aframaxes in turn paved the way for Dalian

New to become the first Chinese yard to build VLCCs.

The attractiveness of the aframax design was a

particular point of pride for Dalian New when A P

Møller opted for an off-the-shelf design from the yard

when it ordered a quartet of ships in 1997.

The more basic design without the thruster units and

the ice strengthening is the specification on which

further newbuildings have been based.

The Dalian New aframax design has been embraced by

the market, with other yards in China having

purchased the rights to it. At the time of the first

aframax order, a Maersk executive said, “The Dalian

New Shipyard was chosen on the basis of good design

specification and a competitive price.”

John Gericke, General Manager, Maersk Ship Design

AS, added, “We have been working closely with Lloyd’s

Register Asia since we first came to China. The

communication and co-operation we enjoy with them

is truly excellent.”

This co-operation between owner, yard and

classification will continue, as A P Møller has just

confirmed an order for a set of VLCCs with Dalian New.

VI Shipbuilding in China • Horizons • June 2004

Dalian New aframax design finds success

“We have been working

closely with Lloyd’s Register

Asia since we first came to

China. The communication

and co-operation we

enjoy with them is truly

excellent.”

John Gericke, General Manager,

Maersk Ship Design AS

Rederi AB Gotland was amply rewarded

when it placed its faith in Guangzhou

Shipyard International by ordering two high-

speed ro-pax vessels from the Chinese yard.

Sweden’s Rederi AB Gotland (Gotland) built two of its new,

high-speed vehicle and passenger ferries at Guangzhou

Shipyard International (GSI) with delivery in 2003.

“To take the step directly from producing tankers and

bulk carriers to such advanced ro-pax ferries would cause

difficulties for any yard, but I must say that GSI adapted its

production very well to cope with our demands. We are

very satisfied with the performance and the quality we

obtained from GSI,” says Anders Larsson, Technical

Manager at Gotland.

The development and design for the new-concept vessels

were generated by the company under the Swedish

government mandate to find a long term solution that

would revitalise transport links to the coastal city of

Gotland. The company drew on its long term contacts

with consulting marine engineers Knud E Hansen of

Copenhagen and Horn Arkitekter MAA of Marstal to

produce the requisite calculations and design drawings.

GSI began the planning the work, together with Gotland,

Knud E Hansen and Lloyd’s Register Asia immediately

after the contract was signed.

The vessels were the first ro-pax projects ever to be built

in China for western owners and required GSI to

collaborate with several Scandinavian sub-contractors for

the propulsion and electrical systems and the outfitting.

Kristian Lind of Knud E Hansen was designated the project

co-ordinator, to act as a link between the yard’s purchasing

and technical departments and the European

subcontractors, Lloyd’s Register and the

Swedish Maritime Administration.

“The close co-operation between the

Lloyd’s Register EMEA plan approval office

in Copenhagen, where all the basic designs

had been approved, and the on-site

Scandinavian surveyors was sublime,” says

Lind, explaining that “knowing the people

you talk to makes matters a lot easier –

especially when it comes to interpreting

Rules and regulations when you are right in

the middle of the production process”.

Lind adds that he believes any owner

would “have a hard time finding

European shipyards that could do better

steel, paint or accommodation jobs than

those we saw from GSI”. He is certain that in the next

several years, there will be more passenger ships and even

cruise ships from the major Chinese shipyards.

Further work at GSIIn addition to the Gotland ships, Lloyd’s Register Asia has

also been involved in the range of product tankers that now

dominate the shipyard’s orderbook.

The tankers being built at GSI are winning praise from their

owners and, importantly, are also making the yard a major

supplier of handysize and handymax tankers. “Four to five

years ago, we were only focused on multi-purpose ships

and dry bulk,” says Xia Suijia, Vice-President of GSI. “Then

we graduated to semi-submersible ships and ro-paxes. We

find the tankers are more suitable, and we insist on them

as a new strategy.” According to Xia, the yard’s competitive

advantage is its modern piping and paint shops.

A P Møller has built over 50 ships in China to date, and

John Gericke, General Manager of Maersk Ship Design AS

is enthusiastic. “The development there has been amazing.

You could actually feel the improvement everyday. They

were very open-minded and willing to adjust themselves

to the demands placed on them,” he says. Gericke worked

in the yard as a newbuilding supervisor at the beginning

of the series and is now involved in overseas China projects

in Dalian.

Since first ordering in GSI in 1997, A P Møller has taken

delivery of 16 ships from Guangzhou. Gericke says that the

first two A P Møller ships, a pair of ro-ros, were completed

to an “excellent” standard and that the current operator

reports trouble-free sailing.

Shipbuilding in China • Horizons • June 2004 VII

GSI demonstrates ro-pax expertise

The Gotland ro-paxes, one of which is pictured below,represented the first time that a western owner had orderedthis type of ship from a Chinese yard.

Lloyd’s Register surveyors workedclosely with the yard and the ownerto help to ensure that the vesselswould be built to a high standard.

At the start of China’s efforts to target the export

market, the country had limited knowledge of

the Rules and regulations of foreign ship

classification societies. The design and drawings

of the first export ship, the 27,000 dwt bulk

carrier Regent Tampopo for Regent Shipping

of Hong Kong, were supplied by the shipowner,

who sourced them from a Japanese shipyard.

Modifications were made to the drawings to

suit Chinese shipyard practices, and all the

major materials and equipment were supplied

by the Japanese shipyard. About 70% of the

contracting value was spent on the importation

of materials, equipment and drawings. The

Regent Tampopo was completed by Dalian

Shipyard to Lloyd’s Register class as scheduled,

with both former Prime Minister Margaret

Thatcher and the late Sir Y K Pao in attendance

at the delivery ceremony.

The first yards to build to Lloyd’s Register class

included Jiangnan Shipyard, Hudong Shipyard,

Dalian New Shipyard and Guangzhou

International Shipyard (GSI).

In 1985, Lloyd’s Register assigned Pokam Wu,

now Principal Surveyor in Charge of Lloyd’s

Register North America, Inc’s Houston Port Office,

as the first country manager to reside in China

after the Second World War.

By 1993, Lloyd’s Register had opened its

representative office in Shanghai. A plan

approval office was added in 1994 which has

become the foundation for Lloyd’s Register

operations for carrying out all surveys for new

construction and ship repair.

VIII Shipbuilding in China • Horizons • June 2004

Lloyd’s Register Asia in China

Nearly a quarter of a century after restarting in

China, Lloyd’s Register retains its leading

position.The range of ships for which Lloyd’s

Register has been awarded class spans the range of

both specialised ships and series construction.

Specialised projects have included a Gotland ro-pax

ship built by GSI and a small diesel electric product

tanker at Qingshan Shipyard for F T Everard.

“There is a general move to more sophisticated

ship types such as chemical tankers, LNG ships, ro-

paxes and others in some of the yards,” says Iain

Wilson, Marine Manager for China.

For series ships there are the 56,000 dwt double-

hull bulk carriers at New Century Shipyard and

Xiamen Shipyard, the 35,000 dwt tankers at GSI

and Dalian New Shipyard and the aframax tankers

at Dalian New Shipyard. Lloyd’s Register has also

contributed to SDARI’s development of the Odyssey

double-hull handymax and panamax bulk carriers.

With the increasing

workload in shipbuilding

and other parts of the

economy, Lloyd’s Register

plans to raise the number

of China staff to 270

in the next year across

the marine, quality

assurance and oil and

gas industry fields.

Lloyd’s Register is

responsible for classing

some 140 vessels totalling

more than 4 million dwt

on order and under

construction in China.

For further information, contact any of the following offices:

Shanghai Port Office 31st Floor, 283 Hua Hai Zhong Road,Hong Kong Plaza (South Tower),Shanghai 200021, PR ChinaTel: +86 21 6390 7070Fax: +86 21 6390 6928Email: shanghai@lr.org

Nantong OfficeRoom 519, Main Office Building,Nantong Ocean Shipping EngineeringCo Ltd, South of Rengang Road,Nantong 226005, PR ChinaTel: +86 513 350 2344Fax: +86 513 350 1299Email: shanghai@lr.org

Shanghai Plan Approval ServicesTel: +86 21 6390 7070Fax: +86 21 6390 7184Email: shanghai-plan-approval@lr.org

Nanjing Officec/o Jinling Shipyard, 55, Yanjiang Road,Nanjing, 210015, PR ChinaTel: +86 25 5879 8531Fax: +86 25 5879 8533Email: nanjing@lr.org

Wuhan OfficeRoom 303, Zhongnan Electric GuestHouse, 688 Min Zhu Road, Wuchang,Wuhan, 430071Tel: +86 27 8781 8749Fax: +86 27 8781 2246Email: wuhan@lr.org

Dalian Office 9th Floor, Block A, Chinabank Plaza, 15-17 Renmin Road, ZhongshanDistrict, Dalian 116001, PR ChinaTel: +86 411 250 7770Fax: +86 411 250 7771Email: dalian@lr.org

Qingdao OfficeJindu Gardens, Block C, Apt 32G, 18 Dong Hai Lu, Qingdao, 266071Tel: +86 532 576 4234Fax: +86 532 572 2249Email: qingdao@lr.org

Guangzhou Office Room 1604, 16th Floor, Peace WorldPlaza, 362-366 Huan Shi Dong Road,Guangzhou, 510060Tel: +86 20 8387 4939Fax: +86 20 8384 9820Email: guangzhou@lr.org

When China embarked on reforms and introduced its ‘open door’ policy in 1979, Lloyd’s

Register was the first foreign classification society invited to survey and class export ships at

Chinese yards, effectively bringing the organisation back to China after it had first established

a presence there in 1869.

> continued from page 8

The objective of this work was to optimise the structuralarrangements for ease of build andin-service maintenance with wideframe spacing longitudinals. Theseguidelines came into existence at thebehest of shipbuilders in Korea whorequested that they be able to buildwith wider frame spacings thanthose currently required by theFinnish-Swedish Rules as a means of making production easier andmore efficient.

The first application of theseguidelines was carried out byLloyd’s Register Asia, in associationwith the FMA, in April 2003 for anice-class 1C upgrade of an aframaxdesign being built by HyundaiSamho Heavy Industries. Since then,Lloyd’s Register Asia has carried outmultiple applications of themethodology as part of an ongoingresearch project being conductedjointly by the InternationalAssociation of ClassificationSocieties and the FMA to update theFinnish-Swedish Rules forapplication to larger vessels.

Propulsion requirements for largersizes of ice-strengthened tankers arealso of great concern to owners andbuilders. Assessing the requirementsof larger tanker sizes with icestrengthening involves extensive icemodel testing using open water hullforms, with the objective being toachieve the highest ice class possiblewith the minimum increase ininstalled power.

These tests are necessary becauseapplying the current formulationsfor minimum power requirementsmay possibly yield unreliableresults, or stipulate propulsionrequirements which may be both

technically and economicallyunviable when applied to largertankers than those on which theformulations are based.

Korean shipyards such as SamsungHeavy Industries have beenconducting ice model tests at specialfacilities in Europe. One such test,using an aframax hull form,determined that achieving therequired installed power increase forice class 1A would involve thespecification of one additionalcylinder unit, bringing the poweroutput up to 14.3 MW from 12.3 MW.

The ice-strengthened tanker ofthe futureOver the years, the Lloyd’s RegisterGroup has had extensiveinvolvement in ice-class issues andcontinues to actively participate innew research projects. The mostrecent of these is the ArcticOperational Platform (ARCOP)project, which is funded by theEuropean Union. The project followson from and is intended to utilise thefindings of three previous projects:

• INSROP – a Russian,Norwegian and Japanese-funded project to investigate theNorthern Sea Route passage

• ICE ROUTES – an EU-fundedice meteorology study for theNorthern Sea Route passage

• ARCDEV – an EU-funded arcticdevelopment voyage projectwhich used a Fortum tankerassisted by Russian ice breakersin the Northern Sea Routepassage in the Russian Arctic.

The aim of the project is to findpractical solutions to the majorproblems identified in the earlierprojects to establish a system of iceoperation and concepts for shippingsolutions for the Northern Sea Route.

Horizons • June 2004 9

Ice-class tankers in Korea

The double-actingconcept, such asthat manifested inthe Mastera, maywell be the wayforward for arcticoperations.

The application of the arcticoperational platform ship designconcepts will probably result in afleet of shuttle tankers fortransferring oil to the western year-round ice-free port of Murmansk.

Tustin finds it likely that the double-acting concept, as embodied in thedouble-acting tankers (DATs),Tempera and Mastera, built byJapanese yard Sumitomo HeavyIndustries for Fortum Shipping ofFinland, will be the most importantfinding to fall out of the ARCOPstudy. The Fortum DATs are 106,000dwt double-hull crude oil/productcarriers which are capable ofproceeding through light iceconditions ahead and heavy iceconditions astern, due to theirazipod propulsion configuration,specially designed aft end andability to turn through 180°.

“The ultimate expression of thecompromise in hull form designbetween open water and iceoperation is the Fortum double-acting tanker, where the designsolution to achieve the bestcompromise between open water andice operation is to operate the ship ina different mode, that is, astern inice,” says Tustin. “It is very likely thatthe ARCOP project will reveal that,actually, this type of ship may be thebest suited to the ice conditionsfound in the northern arctic.”

For further information contact Rob Tustin, Head of Busan Plan Approval Services, Lloyd’sRegister Asia

Email: robert.tustin@lr.orgTel: +82 (0)51 640 5010Fax: +82 (0)51 637 4114

On October 1, 2002, MitsubishiHeavy Industries (MHI) hullnumber 2180, an 18-deck, 115,875 grtcruise ship being built for P&OPrincess Cruises to Lloyd’s Registerclass, caught fire and burned forover 18 hours. The fire was adevastating shock to the hopes ofeveryone involved in the project -the yard, the owner, the classificationsociety and, significantly, thetownspeople of Nagasaki, for whomMHI is a highly symbolic employerand a source of great civic pride.

The blow was particularly grievousbecause MHI had worked hard towin the prestigious contract for thetwo ships, the first cruise ships to beordered by P&O Princess from anAsian yard. The shipbuilder wasalso eager to show that ships of thistype could be built to as high astandard in the Far East as in themore frequently favoured Europeanyards. The first of these prestigiousships, MHI hull number 2180, was tohave been called the DiamondPrincess, with its sister ship, MHIhull number 2181, to be christenedthe Sapphire Princess.

As a result of the fire, it was decidedthat hull number 2181, the SapphirePrincess, which was to have been thesecond in the series, would bedelivered first and take on the nameof the Diamond Princess. This firstship was delivered on schedule inFebruary 2004.

MHI had never missed a deliverycommitment in its 147-year history sothere was tremendous energy devotedto a thorough assessment of how theshipbuilder could indeed repair anddeliver the fire-damaged hull. Theassessment carried out by the yard, itsexperts and Lloyd’s Register Asia laidthe groundwork for the ambitiousreconstruction effort.

“The conclusion that the vesselcould be rebuilt and completed asnew was both significant andbrave,” says John Finch, Lloyd’sRegister Asia’s Marine BusinessManager for Japan. “The assessmenthelped to show the way forward interms of procedures and opened the

door for the shipyard to work withits suppliers and to reach anagreement with the shipowner onhow to proceed with delivery.”

Damage sustainedThe damage to the fire-ravagedvessel was substantial, and it wasknown by all those involved thatrecovering the ship and meeting thenew delivery schedule would requirea concerted and sustained effort.

Immediately following the fire, theship sat in the water listing from thetonnes of seawater sprayed to dousethe tenacious fire, with water pouringout of the side shell doors on deck 4.Windows were blackened and brokenfrom decks 4 to 15. Much of thesteelwork above deck 5 was damagedso badly that it had to be removed.The wheel house was lost, togetherwith some very expensivenavigational and safety systemscontrol equipment, but the firestopped before the engine room andconsequently the main propulsionand machinery were saved. Access tothe ship was severely restricted as thepolice and fire authorities conducteda painstaking investigation.

Rebuilding the shipThe ships were being built in MHI’shistoric Tategami plant in Nagasaki’sinner harbour, but after the fire, hullnumber 2180 was moved to the moremodern dock at Koyagi, where largegantry cranes worked to remove thedamaged steel superstructure.

In the salvageable section of the ship,the vastly different levels of damagenecessitated a segregation of thecontaminated and decontaminatedspaces. The hull in the structurallyintact, but damaged ‘dark grey zone’ was stripped of outfitting, shot blasted, cleaned by specialistsand rinsed with fresh water.

10 Horizons • June 2004

P&O Princess Cruise reconstruction

Like new in Nagasaki

The inside story of how proud craftsmanship,

engineering and teamwork brought a cruise ship

newbuilding back to life.

The fire-fighting waterfound its way throughthe HVAC duct systemto distant cornersaway from the fire, asshown in this duct.

In the ‘light grey zone’, all the stainlesssteel pipes were replaced while thesteel was cleaned by specialists andrinsed with fresh water.

Contamination of clean areas by fire products from the dirty areaswas prevented by strictlysegregating the clean areas, thepartially damaged areas and thecompletely destroyed areas.

Hundreds of swab samples weretaken from all over the visiblyundamaged areas to check for chlorideand sulphur tetraoxide contamination.After decontamination, areas werechecked again using a quick test tocheck for chlorine, to ensure thatcleaning had been successful.

Because the fire distorted the ship, itsalignment was checked regularlyduring the reconstruction to ensurethat the original alignment, or better,would be achieved.

All the damaged material was cutaway and the steel was cut back tosound material, with great care beingtaken to remove old welding at blockconnections. In one or two places,samples of steel were taken andtested to verify that only soundmaterial remained.

A scrapping policy was audited toensure that condemned items couldnot find their way back onboard.Scrapped items were carefullysegregated to minimise the risk ofcross contamination.

The recovery effort“The progress of the recovery andthe re-building were kept on time asa result of the dedication andorganisation of the MHImanagement and workforce,” saysRichard Haslam-Jones, ProjectManager for P&O Princess Cruisesin Nagasaki.

“It has been a unique achievementand all those who took part should be recognised for their contributions,”he says. “There is no trace of the fireleft, and the ship is truly as newagain. It is ready for service, and I am sure it will have a long andsuccessful career in the cruisebusiness.”

Successful teamwork“After the fire and following thedecision to proceed with rebuildingthe ship, MHI mobilised itsengineering and logistical might ina spectacular way,” says Finch. “Theyard is to be highly commended onthe demonstration of its ability todeliver two very large cruise shipsonly three months apart, especiallyfollowing such a devastatingincident.”

Peter Ratcliffe, CEO of P&OPrincess Cruises, says, “We aregreatly appreciative of the greatefforts made by MHI, its workforceand its sub-contractors in achievingthe successful delivery of bothvessels, thus allowing them to beavailable for the important 2004summer season.”

Horizons • June 2004 11

Sakao Fukuda, Manager for CruiseShips, MHI explains that theshipbuilder was able to deliver thetwo cruise ships within threemonths of each other thanks to theextra surveying resources deployedby Lloyd’s Register Asia.

“We saw quite a few new faces andeveryone worked long hours toovercome the concentration ofinspection requirements. Weappreciate Lloyd’s Register Asia’scontribution to the smooth progresstowards completion,” he says.

Fukuda adds, “We were very happywith what Lloyd’s Register Asiabrought to the project for both theshipyard and the shipowner. Weunderstand that this was the firstimplementation of Lloyd’sRegister’s quality assurance schemefor cruise vessels and feel that thiswas a significant contribution.”

The successful management of the recovery work also involvedreorganising and rescheduling the rest of the yard’s work aroundthe reconstruction. This wasaccomplished without losing anorder or missing a delivery date,other than the first P&O Princessship. “It was a truly professionalpiece of work,” concludes Haslam-Jones.

For further information contact John Finch, Marine BusinessManager for Japan, Lloyd’s Register Asia

Email: john.finch@lr.orgTel: +81 (0)45 682 5255Fax: +81 (0)45 682 5259

Full use was made of the massive cranecapacity at the Koyagi facility to lift theblock assemblies onboard.

The Sapphire Princess wassuccessfully delivered after aconcerted joint effort from theyard, the owner and theclassification society.

Lloyd’s Register’s fuel oil advisoryand bunker analysis service(FOBAS), along with a number ofother companies involved in thebunker industry, is taking part in a study which aims to develop a reliable and repeatable testmethod for fuel ignition analysisagainst which fuel ignition analysis machines can be testedand approved by the EnergyInstitute (EI).

The Lloyd’s Register FOBASrepresentative to the EI panel,Wanda Fabriek, International FuelExecutive for Intertek Caleb Brett,assisted in initiating the task force,which will be chaired by consultantRinus Daane.

The stated scope of the study is asfollows: “To provide for thedefinition and measurement ofignition and combustioncharacteristics of residual fuelswith a standardised approach, withthe aim of producing aninternational standard test method.The measurement of ignition andcombustion characteristics will bebased on constant-volumecombustion chamber technology.Data produced by the test methodcould potentially be used to defineignition and combustioncharacteristics of residual fuel oilsfor possible specification use.”

Membership of the task forcecomprises representatives from oilcompanies BP Marine, Shell GlobalSolutions, Shell Marine Productsand TotalFinaElf; enginemanufacturers MAN B&W andWärtsilä; testing service providers

Lloyd’s Register FOBAS, IntertekCaleb Brett, DNV PetroleumServices, Lintec, ViswaLab andFueltech; and consultants Tharby & Associates.

The determination of the ignitionquality of residual fuels has been aproblem since the late 1970s,according to Tim Wilson, FOBASService Manager. “As has beenwidely documented, issuessurrounding the quality andcharacteristics of ship’s fuel aroseat this time as a result of newrefinery practices which resulted inheavier residues and required theuse of blending processes, whichconsequently impacted fuelcharacteristics.”

Currently, fuel ignitioncharacteristics are calculated usingan empirical formula called theCalculated Carbon AromaticityIndex which gives an indication ofthe ignition quality of the fuel.However, in some cases, thisformula is not able to predict thefuel’s true ignition characteristics.As a result, the industry has, for anumber of years, been seeking atest method which will assist in

12 Horizons • June 2004

FOBAS involved in fuel ignition study

Lloyd’s Register FOBAS participates in fuel ignition study

Lloyd’s Register, along with a number of other industry organisations and

companies, is taking part in a study which hopes to establish an authoritative

test method for the ignition and combustion characteristics of residual fuels.

It is hoped that a standard test methodwill prevent unnecessary damage tomachinery; pictured, a piston damagedas a result of ignition quality problems.

Devices such as this inductively coupled plasma machinecan be used to assess metal content in marine fuels.

defining the true nature of theignition and combustioncharacteristics for a particularresidual fuel.

“Once the test method iscompleted, inclusive of acceptableprecision data in accordance withISO 4259, the industry will bebetter able to rate the ignitioncharacteristics of fuel,” says Wilson.

Wilson points out that currentlythere is no existing standard testmethod to determine ignition andcombustion characteristics ofresidual fuels. The task force hopesto reach a satisfactory conclusionwhich will give shipowners,operators, engine designers andbuilders an additional tool to helpthem to gain a better understandingof how their machinery willperform. The task force recentlyheld its second meeting and aims tohave a proposed method preparedfor 2005.

For further information contact Tim Wilson, FOBAS ServiceManager

Email: timothy.wilson@lr.orgTel: +44 (0)20 7423 1862Fax: +44 (0)20 7423 1750

s in fuel ignition study

Horizons • June 2004 13

FOBAS enhances serviceLloyd’s Register’s fuel oil and bunker advisory service (FOBAS) has added

several new aspects to its already comprehensive marine-fuel related

services, making it easier than ever for clients to take advantage of the

value that the service offers.

FOBAS offers in-depth technical evaluations of the many grades of

marine fuels available on the market, using analysis procedures which are

set to international quality standards and industry-recognised test

methods. In addition, the FOBAS consultants who interpret the test

results and provide advice are experienced professional marine engineers

with first-hand knowledge of shipboard machinery. The service can be as

basic or as comprehensive as the client wishes, according to his particular

fuel risk management needs, ranging from a simple analysis package to

the implementation of a fully integrated fuel management system.

In addition, the service will provide a sophisticated information

management and reporting system through www.lrfobas.com which will

provide clients with instant access to analysis reports and sample statistics,

customised searches and reports on fleet data, monthly bunker reports

and technical bulletins, periodic trend graphs on key data and bottle

tracking and stock control.

FOBAS is unique in that it offers an engineering-based consultancy

service, in addition to its fuel testing services, with the latter being

provided in partnership with testing house Intertek, a market leader in

the industry with a global reach. FOBAS’ unique emphasis on technical

evaluation and fuel management support is an important feature for

owners and operators.

“To a shipowner, the analysis from the lab is only one part of the

solution,” says Tim Wilson, Service Manager of FOBAS. “What FOBAS

does is to apply the results of the analysis specifically to the machinery

plant onboard, to determine how the information obtained from the lab

analysis should be put to use. We understand the machinery plant, and as

we are marine engineers, we speak the same ‘language’ as the people

onboard who will have to take the necessary actions.”

FOBAS has opened a newlab in Singapore for thebenefit of its clients.

The ISPS Code learning

curve has been steep for

everyone and, as with the

ISM Code, it is expected that

the learning process will

continue for years to come.

Ships have been trading forcenturies without an InternationalShip and Port Facility Security(ISPS) Code, but this does notnecessarily mean that they wereinsecure. In advance of theadoption of the Code, a fairproportion of ships, as with theInternational Safety Management(ISM) Code and onboard safetyaspects, had already been runningeffectively and taking many of thesecurity measures detailed in thelegislation. For these ships, theCode merely represented the needto formalise existing arrangements,such that the security managementsystem could be reviewed andimproved in a structured way andthat operators could provideevidence of their compliance. The real challenge for owners hasbeen co-ordinating their efforts withthose of the flag states, the portsand other bodies, such asrecognised security organisations

(RSOs). Some flag stateadministrations have been proactivein assisting their fleets, while othershave not provided the requiredsupport. Ports are also split, withsome progressing well and othersnot even having begun.

“The main lesson to be learnt is thateffort and commitment from allparties is required to enhancemaritime security,” says Tony Field,Lloyd’s Register EMEA’s Manager ofMarine Management Systems inPiraeus. He points out that anunderstanding of what the Coderequires and how compliance can bepractically achieved has improvedsignificantly since the approval andverification process began. “As anRSO, the Lloyd’s Register Group hascontinuously adapted its proceduresbased on concrete experience andhas held seminars for the industry todiscuss developments and knownproblems,” he says.

Problems encounteredThe ISPS certification process involvestwo steps: the ship security plan (SSP)approval and the verification audit.Problems have been encountered inboth parts of the process andsolutions have been identified. In terms of SSP approval, problems

have been encountered when shipsecurity assessments have not beencarried out correctly. Often, theprescribed countermeasures do notcorrespond to the vulnerabilitiesidentified and, in addition, someassessments do not address securityin an emergency. Lloyd’s RegisterEMEA has also found on occasionthat when the ship securityassessment has been carried out bya sub-contractor, and not theshipowning or operating companyitself, the security measuresproposed have been impractical.The personnel that deal withmanagement systems hold a wealthof knowledge and are capable ofinjecting some much neededcommon sense into the process ofcarrying out ship securityassessments and should be utilisedin this manner.

In terms of the verification audit, thephysical condition of the vessel itselfhas been the main reason for failingto gain certification, with theconditions onboard not reflectingthe requirements of the SSP.Sometimes even the simplest things,such as doors not locking or closing,and other physical requirements thatare in the plan have not beencomplied with. Control of access tothe vessel is another area which hasproved to be problematic, often dueto the company not complying withthe requirements of its own SSP.

Of great concern are ‘non-userfriendly’ SSPs which make thevessel extremely secure but aretotally impractical to implementonboard a working vessel. A similarsituation arose during theimplementation of the ISM Code,when some companies incorporated‘nice to have’ requirements into theirsafety management systems.

14 Horizons • June 2004

ISPS Code implementation

Learning from the ISPS Code

The Minerva Astra wasthe first Greek-flaggedship to be issued anISSC by Lloyd's RegisterEMEA.

Horizons • June 2004 15

Greece goes aheadIn spite of the hiccups along theway, ISPS Code implementationhas continued apace, especially inmajor shipping centres and hubssuch as Singapore, Dubai andGreece. Lloyd’s Register EMEAmoved its centre for marinemanagement systems to Piraeusfrom Rotterdam in January of thisyear in order to be closer to itssignificant client base in Greeceand to assist in the process of ISPSCode implementation.

In Greece, many shippingcompanies are well ahead ofschedule in preparing their SSPsand in gaining certification, withMinerva Marine, Thenamaris ShipManagement, Eletson Corporation,Avin International and CeresHellenic among the forerunners ingaining their ISSCs.

Apostolos Poulovassilis, Managerof Lloyd’s Register EMEA’sPiraeus, East Mediterranean andBlack Sea Area Office, points outthat Minerva and Eletson were infact the first companies to havetheir Greek-flagged fleets’ SSPsapproved on behalf of the Greekgovernment after Lloyd’s RegisterEMEA had received its officialauthorisation to act as an RSO forthe Hellenic Republic.

In November 2003, Thenamarisbecame one of the first shipoperators in Greece to have itsSSPs approved, and in February2004 became the first company into be issued an ISSC by Lloyd’sRegister EMEA, for its tanker MT Ellina.

Minerva Marine’s double-hull tanker,Minerva Astra, in March 2004, becamethe first Greek-flagged vessel to becertified for ISPS Code complianceby Lloyd’s Register EMEA.

Avin International, a ship managerwhich looks after a fleet of 25tankers, has taken advantage of arange of Lloyd’s Register EMEA’smaritime security-related services.“Since the very beginning of ourISPS Code implementation, wehave closely co-operated withLloyd’s Register EMEA on a largespectrum of issues, includingcompany and ship security officertraining, ship security assessmentand plan approval and certificationof vessels. This co-operation hasproven to be valuable, productiveand efficient,” says V Kyrikos,Avin’s Company Security Manager.

Meanwhile, Lloyd’s RegisterEMEA has also secured an ISPScontract for over 20 vessels fromCeres Hellenic.

Upcoming challengesIn order to help to ensure that clientscan achieve compliance as efficientlyas possible, the Lloyd’s RegisterGroup has invested a great deal inensuring that its ISPS Code auditornetwork is as comprehensive aspossible. As of April 2004, theLloyd’s Register Group had qualifiednearly 95% of its ISM auditors tocarry out ISPS Code work, creating aglobal network of over 200 ISPSCode auditors.

The process does not conclude,however, once the deadline forcompliance has passed. The nextsignificant challenge will arise afterthe Code has been implemented.

“The industry will have to ensurethat the systems put into place area benefit to the vessels and theports and not just a bureaucraticburden,” says Field. “Thosecompanies which are committed tothe spirit of the Code will continueto improve, but the ones that onlypay lip service to the Code willstruggle.” He points out that thiswas precisely the situation with theimplementation of the ISM Code.

“There will be many lessons learntover the next 12 to 18 months, andcompanies should be prepared tomake changes to their systems,” hesays. “All companies should belooking to streamline theirprocedures and to ensure that theirsystems for safety and security arefully compatible.”

Field makes a final point about theimportance of seafarers and theirinvolvement in the process. “Itwould really please seagoing staffif companies can show them thatthey are committed to reducing theadministrative burden whilemaintaining operationaleffectiveness.”

For further information contact Tony Field, Marine ManagementSystems Manager, Lloyd’s RegisterEMEA, Piraeus Office

Email: tony.field@lr.orgTel: +30 210 458 0829Fax: +30 210 452 8955

Tony Field, Lloyd'sRegister EMEA'sManager of MarineManagement Systems

Horizons • June 2004 16

Horizons newsletter

For further information on our marine services, please contact Richard Buchan: Tel: +44 (0)20 7423 2305Fax: +44 (0)20 7423 2213Email: marine@lr.org

Managing Editor: Dolly Robinson,Marine Media Manager,Marine Business Development

Horizons Managing Editor, Dolly Robinson

Lloyd’s Register EMEA

71 Fenchurch Street,

London EC3M 4BS, UK

Tel: + 44 (0)20 7709 9166

Fax: + 44 (0)20 7423 2057

Email: emea@lr.org

Horizons

Exhibitions andtechnical

papers

Over the next three months (May2004 to July 2004 inclusive) we willbe sponsoring and exhibiting at:

Posidonia 2004, Piraeus, Greece, June 8 - 11

We will be exhibiting at:

Offshore Technology Conference(OTC) 2004, Houston, USA, May 3 – 6

RoRo 2004, Gothenburg, Sweden,May 25 – 27

INTERSEC Security Conference,London, UK, June 8 – 10

We will be presenting papers at:

Financing & Operating LNGShipping, London, UK, May 13 – 14,Jim MacDonald

2nd International Conference &Exhibition on Ballast WaterManagement (ICBWM), Singapore,May 19 – 21, Lefteris Karaminas

CWC’s 3rd Annual LNG NorthAmerica Summit, Houston, USA,May 27 – 28, Tim Protheroe & Ed Waryas

On the Horizon

Lloyd’s Register’s Classification Newsdelivers up-to-date information onissues requiring urgent andimmediate dissemination to themarine industry. Recent inspectionand statutory alerts we have issuedinclude:

• Indian Ocean MOU announcesnew concentrated inspectioncampaign on life-savingappliances

• report of the 51st session of theMarine Environment ProtectionCommittee (MEPC 51)

• port state control detentions – flagadministration requirements

Building better business

Lloyd’s Register Asia

Suite 3501 China Merchants Tower

Shun Tak Centre, 168–200 Connaught

Road Central, Hong Kong, SAR of PRC

Tel: +852 2287 9333 Fax: +852 2526 2921

Email: asia@lr.org

Lloyd’s Register Americas, Inc.

1401 Enclave Parkway, Suite 200

Houston, Texas, 77077, USA

Tel: +1 281 675 3100 Fax: +1 281 675 3139

Email: americas@lr.org

www.lr.org

Services are provided by members of the Lloyd’s Register Group.June 2004

Lloyd’s Register Registered office: 71 Fenchurch Street, London EC3M 4BS

Horizons newsletter is produced byMarine Business Development anddesigned by Pipeline Design.

Care is taken to ensure that theinformation in Horizons is accurate andup-to-date. However Lloyd’s Registeraccepts no responsibility for inaccuraciesin, or changes to such information.

• report of 47th session of the ShipDesign and Equipment Sub-Committee (DE 47)

• Tokyo MOU announcesharmonised action on shipsecurity to start April 1, 2004

• international convention for thecontrol and management of ships’ballast water and sediments

• safety alert on lifeboat releasemechanisms.

Classification News is available free ofcharge. These issues, together with thearchive of alerts, may be viewedelectronically at www.cdlive.lr.org

Cover image: a Lloyd's Register surveyor in one ofthe Hellespont Alhambra's tanks in Okpo, SouthKorea, photo courtesy of of Kenebec Images Ltd.