427
1 INTRODUCTION
It should be noted that the sea transport has grown
drastically during last times causing evolution in
regulations enforced to provide safe sea passages.
Many of the regulations are the result of losses of
ships, which were previously regarded as safe.
By law, every ship in all loading conditions must
satisfy damage stability requirements led in “The
international convention for the Safety of Life at Sea,
1974” – ( SOLAS). The damage stability criteria has
been modified in 1990, with additional, simplified
stability information for the master. Depending on
ship’s size and ship’s type, the SOLAS convention has
stringent requirements regarding the survival in case
of damage.
Some regulations are described for a number of
ship types in conventions and their relative Codes.
− International Bulk Chemical Code (IBC,1978) for
chemical tankers;
− International Gas Code (IGC, 1978) for gas tankers;
− MARPOL (1978) for oil tankers;
− Additions to SOLAS (1990) convention for
passenger ships.
The regulations enforced for the construction and
maintenance of Ro-Ro / Passenger ships are much
more stringent than those for cargo ships in an
attempt to provide safe sea passage. The most
dangerous problem for a Ro-Ro/Passenger ship with
Stockholm Agreement Analysis for Ro-Ro Passenger
Ships Navigating in the North European Waters and the
Baltic Sea
M. Szymoński
Polish Naval Academy, Gdynia, Poland
ABSTRACT: This paper is an extension of work originally presented in 2019 EUROPEAN NAVIGATION
CONFERENCE (ENC) [4]. The paper has described the important role of the Stockholm Agreement in safety of
the Ro-Ro/Passenger ships in the north European waters. The present work describes the way in which we can
improve the safety in strong chance of destruction of ship at sea. All results are generalized for a given group of
ships. The specific construction of the RO-RO/ Passenger ships, being characterized by flat vehicle decks which
are practically open, un-subdivided, and additional passenger accommodation space, with ramp fitted astern
and in some cases in fore or side of the ship, giving access to cars, trucks and trailers, or specific trains which
remain on board in their laden state, has resulted in international regulation requiring, amongst other things,
strengthening the damage stability requirements for this type of ships. The more stringent damage stability
criteria has been adopted on a regional basis by northern European countries as STOCKHOLM Agreement, in
1996. The paper concerns an analyze of damage stability calculations results in compliance with the
STOCKHOLM Agreement, when the Ro-Ro/ Passenger ship is fully loaded, with maximum Deadweight (DWT)
and maximum draught, or partly loaded, with reduced DWT, and occurs Minor or Major penetration of
destroyed compartments.
http://www.transnav.eu
the International Journal
on Marine Navigation
and Safety of Sea Transportation
Volume 15
Number 2
June 2021
DOI: 10.12716/1001.15.02.22
428
an enclosed deck is the effect of a build-up of
significant amount of water on that deck. The
principle of additional water on deck has been
adopted to account for the risk of accumulation of
water on deck as a result of the dynamic behavior, in a
sea way, or of the ship after sustaining side collision
damage.
If the ship’s position and stability are calculated,
the question arises: if the damaged condition is
sufficiently safe, and if the “critical openings” are still
watertight which does not let water through.
The damage stability requirements applicable to
Ro-Ro / Passenger ships in 1990 (SOLAS’90) include
the effect of water ingress to the main Ro-Ro cargo
deck in a sea state in order of 1.5 meters of significant
wave height (hs).
There are a number of publications regarding the
damage stability regulations [3, 5], which set to come
into force in 2009 .
These new regulations are based on a wide range
of related design parameters, such as the number,
positioning and local optimization of transverse
bulkheads, the presence and position of longitudinal
bulkheads below the main vehicle deck, the presence
of side casings, and the height of the main deck and
double bottom. In addition, the effects of water on
deck and of operational parameters as draught, center
of gravity and trim, has to be taken into consideration.
The open un-subdivided vehicle deck space of
presented Ro-Ro/ Passenger ship, is shown in Figure
1.
Figure 1. The open cargo deck of Polish Ro – Ro/ Passenger
ship: M/F “Gryf” [photo by author]
The damage stability criteria and provisions laid
down in the SOLAS 2009 and STOCKHOLM
Agreement are as follows:
1. Range of positive part of the GZ curve >10
DEG;
2. The area under the righting lever curve ≥
0.015 mrad;
3. Maximum heeling angle < 12 DEG;
4. Metacentric height > 0.05 m;
5. Maximum GZ ≥ 0,1 m;
6. Maximum GZ ≥ (heeling moment) /
(displacement) + 0.04 m , taking into account
the greatest of the following moments:
− The wind pressure of 120 N/m
2
,
− The crowding of all passengers towards one
side of the vessel,
− The launching of a fully loaded davit-launched
survival crafts on one side.
During the sea passage not all ballast tanks can be
filled up. The ship can be in Full load or Part load
condition, and still have a number of empty ballast
tanks. If such empty ballast tank is damaged, after that
a sea water flows in, which can lead to a dangerous
list or even capsizing. However, a completely full
ballast tank that incurs a damage, can also be
dangerous.
The selected cases of the Ro-Ro/Passenger ship in
damage condition are discussed in this paper, when
the Ro-Ro/ Passenger ship is fully loaded, with
maximum Deadweight (DWT) and maximum
draught, or partly loaded, with reduced DWT, and
occurs Minor or Major penetration of destroyed
compartments.
Damages with Minor penetration correspond to
the small penetration from the ship’s side limited by
the wing tanks or by the longitudinal bulkheads. The
Major penetration corresponds to the damage with
penetration through wing tanks or longitudinal
bulkheads to the opposite side of the ship.
For the above ship’s designs: fully loaded and
partly loaded, the stability calculations has been made
in compliance with the STOCKHOLM Agreement to
determine what the position, stability and list would
be in damaged condition.
2 SIGNIFICANT WAVE HEIGHTS
The water is assumed to enter the Ro-Ro vehicle deck
via a damaged “critical opening” and accumulated on
deck. It is required that Ro-Ro/Passenger ship, in
addition to complying with the full requirements of
SOLAS’90, further complies with part of regulations
of SOLAS with the defined water on deck. The height
of water on deck (hw) is dependent on the residual
freeboard after the damage (fr), and is measured in
way of the damage. The residual freeboard (fr) is
defined as the minimum distance between the
damaged Ro-Ro vehicle deck and the final waterline,
as it was shown in Figure 2.
The damage stability requirements applicable to
the Ro-Ro/ Passenger ships in 1990 (SOLAS’90)
include the effect of water entering the vehicle deck in
sea state in the order of 1.5 meters significant wave
height. If the significant wave height, in the area
concerned, is 1.5 meters or less, than no additional
water is assumed to accumulate on the damaged Ro-
Ro deck.
In order to enable the ship to survive in more
severe sea states, those requirements have been
upgraded to take into account the effect of water on
deck for sea state between 1.5 meters to 4.0 meters of
the significant wave height. The significant wave
height (hs) is the qualifying parameter, in association
with a 90% probability that hs is not exceeded for Ro-
Ro/Passenger ships operating regular scheduled
voyages between designated ports in geographically
429
defined restricted areas: North West Europe and the
Baltic Sea.
Figure 2. The residual freeboard definition. [2, 4]
It has to be assumed , that a variable quantity of
water on ro-ro deck depends not only on the residual
freeboard and significant wave height, but also on the
variable angle of heel.
3 THE STOCKHOLM AGREEMENT ( 1996)
The STOCKHOLM Agreement, concerning a specific
stability requirements for Ro-Ro/Passenger ships
undertaking regular scheduled international voyages
between or to, or from designated ports in North-
West Europe and the Baltic Sea has noted in
particular, the prevailing, often adverse, sea and
weather conditions with low visibility, the low water
temperatures, the need to maintain intensive all year
round passenger ferry services, recent accidents and
the density of Ro-Ro/Passenger ship movements.
The stability requirements have been upgraded to
take into account the effect of water which could
accumulate on the damaged Ro-Ro deck, and to
establish the stability standard to enable the ship to
survive in more severe sea states. The knowledge of
the wave heights in sea areas covered by the discussed
Agreement, is necessary when taking into account the
effect of a hypothetical amount of sea water
accumulating on the first deck above the waterline of
the Ro-Ro/ Passenger ship, when entering through
bow, stern, and side doors assumed to be damaged.
Taking into consideration the amount of water on
the Ro-Ro deck, the figure of up to 0.5 meters,
depending on the significant wave height and
residual freeboard, have been undertaken in
STOCKHOLM Agreement.
It is clear, that the residual freeboard of damaged
ship has a significant effect on amount of water to be
cumulated on Ro-Ro deck. The maximum residual
freeboard to be taken into account was agreed as 2.0
meters.
If the residual freeboard ≥ 2.0 meters, then the
height of water on deck hw = 0.0 meters.
If the residual freeboard ≤ 2.0 meters, then the
height of water on deck hw = 0.5 meters.
Figure 3. The height of water on deck (hw) calculations,
with the relation to a significant wave height (hs). [2, 4]
For example, if residual freeboard is equal fr =1.25
meters and the height of significant wave: hs = 3.5
meters, the height of water expected on deck: hw = 0.5
meters.
Some model tests and analytical predictions made
by the Naval Architects and Marine Engineers [2]
suggested that 0.5 m³/m² was a reasonable water level
for 4.0 m significant wave height. The same tests and
analytical predictions indicated that the height of
water on the Ro-Ro/Passenger cargo deck goes to zero
as the “residual freeboard/significant wave height”
ratio rises above 0.5. Therefore in order to assume
zero water accumulation, in a significant wave height
of 4.0 m, a residual freeboard of 2.0 meters in
damaged Ro-Ro/ Passenger ship would be required.
4 DESCRIPTION OF ANALYSED RO-RO /
PASSENGER SHIP
The general arrangement of the analyzed ship is
shown in Figures 4 & 5.
Figure 4. Reference for volumes included in Ro – Ro /
Passenger ship as buoyancy for stability. [1, 4]
Figure 5. The general arrangement of volumes included in
damage stability calculations. [1, 4]
In Figure 5: A – The double bottom with Ballast
Tanks, Fuel Tanks, and Dry Tanks; B – Engine room; C
- Cargo space in lower deck and the wing tanks.
430
The volumes “A”, “B”, “C” are included in
damage calculations.
Various possible ship’s damage scenarios,
concerning a several number of different
compartments to be flooded, are considered to
include the worst sake of ship’s survivability.
The following particulars has been taken into
account for damage stability analysis:
− Gross Tonnage 18 653
− Length overall 158,0 m
− Breadth 24.0 m
− Height 45.0 m
− Draught maximum 5.9 m
− Displacement for maximum draught 13 692 t
The calculations has been performed for the ship
with maximum value of DWT and with the minimum
allowable Metacentric height GM, according to the
requirements described in the Loading Manual [9].
In addition, the calculations were performed for
reduced DWT, for the ship with no full cargo on decs,
in order to show the way in which the improvement
of the seaworthiness of the Ro-Ro/Passenger ship,
expecting a bad weather conditions during the sea
passage, can be done.
In the state of maximum DWT, the mean draught
is equal 5.75 meters, and the Metacentric height GM =
1.53 meters.
In the state of reduced DWT, the mean draught is
equal 5.40 meters, and the Metacentric height GM =
1.83 meters.
The calculation were made for Minor penetration –
it means the small penetration from the ship’s side,
limited by the wing tanks or by the longitudinal
bulkheads.
In case of calculations made for the Major
penetration, which corresponds to penetration
through wing tanks or longitudinal bulkheads to the
centerline, a very important is fact, that in all the
cases, which has been presented below, there is no
residual stability , and ship will capsize or sink.
Such penetration can fill up the engine room “B”
or cargo space “C” , which is shown in Figure 6.
Figure 6. The open cargo space “C” below the main deck,
located on “ Top Tank”, and surrounded by the wing tanks.
[photo by author]
5 ANALYSIS OF SHIP’S SURVIVABILITY IN
DAMAGE SITUATIONS
Details regarding the stability of the Ro-Ro/ Passenger
ship for selected damage scenarios and compliance for
the STOCKHOLM Agreement are shown below. A
several cases has been taken into account.
5.1 The case of minor penetration below the main deck
This Case is presented in Figure 7.
Figure 7. The Minor penetration of starboard side
compartments. [ 7 , 9 ]
5.1.1 The intact conditions for the ship in maximum
DWT state, are as follows: mean draught:
5.75 meters, no trim, the intact Metacentric height:
GMo = 1.53 meters.
The damaged compartments Permeability [%]
_______________________________________________
27 Dry tank 0.95
Tanks 22, 23, 24, 35 0.95
15 FW tank 0.95
14 + 30 FW tanks 0.95
Dry tank 0.95
WB tank 0.95
11 SB Heeling tank 0.95
Extent of damage is as follows: Damage between
frames: 30 – 63, Penetration: inboard 4.80 meters,
Flooded volume: 6 767.1 m
3
.
Table 1. Stability factors
_______________________________________________
Maximum righting arm (max. GZ) - 0.08 m
Heel angle at GZ max. 10.3 deg
Range of GZ curve 0.0 deg
_______________________________________________
Table 2. Critical openings distance to the waterline
_______________________________________________
Frame Distance Reduction of distance
No. to the to the waterline
waterline per degree of heel
_______________________________________________
Stern door - 6 - 4.62 m 0.16 m
Door 3 rd. Deck 50 - 9.72 m 0.25 m
Bow door 197 -3.63 m 0.15 m
_______________________________________________
In the state of maximum DWT, the ship will
capsize in the above conditions of damage, due to the
stability loss.
431
5.1.2 The intact conditions for the reduced DWT: the
mean draught is equal 5.40 meters, and the intact
Metacentric height GMo = 1.83 meters.
The extent of damage: Penetration: inboard 4.80
meters, flooded volume: 757.3 m3 .
The Floating Conditions of ship in this case of
damage are as follows:
Table 3. Floating conditions
_______________________________________________
Draught Trim Heel GM
Aft Midships Forward
_______________________________________________
5.82 m 5.46 m 5.09 m - 0.73 m 10.7 deg 1.0 m
_______________________________________________
Table 4. Stability parameters
_______________________________________________
Maximum righting arm (max. GZ) 0.02 m
Heel angle at GZ max. 12.5 deg
Range of GZ curve 3.6 deg
_______________________________________________
Table 5. Critical openings distance to the waterline
_______________________________________________
Frame Distance Reduction of distance
No. to the to the waterline
waterline per degree of heel
_______________________________________________
Stern door - 6 1.09 m 0.10 m
Door 3 rd. Deck 50 0.64 m 0.23 m
Bow door 197 1.90 m 0.10 m
_______________________________________________
In this case of damage, the ship in state of reduced
DWT has a small stability margin, but she will float in
equilibrium position. The stability is however not
sufficient to comply with the criteria of SOLAS’90.
5.2 The case of major penetration below the main deck
This case is presented in Figure 8.
Figure 8. The damage case of Major penetration. [1, 4]
5.2.1 The intact ship’s conditions in state of maximum
DWT are: the mean draught of 5.75 meters, and the
intact Metacentric height GMo = 1.53 meters.
Damaged compartments Permeability [%]
_______________________________________________
13 WB tank 0.95
38 SB Dry tank 0.95
Engine room 0.85
37 SB bilge water 0.95
Steering gear room 0.85
Extent of damage is as follows: damage between
frames: 6 – 58. Penetration: inboard 4.80 meters,
flooded volume: 6 767.1 m
3
.
Table 6. Stability parameters
_______________________________________________
Maximum righting arm (max. GZ) - 0.02 m
Heel angle at GZ max. 0.0 deg
Range of GZ curve 0.0 deg
_______________________________________________
Table 7. Critical openings distance to the waterline
_______________________________________________
Frame Distance Reduction of distance
No. to the to the waterline
waterline per degree of heel
_______________________________________________
Stern door - 6 -7.53 m 0.16 m
Door 3 rd. Deck 50 -11.5 m 0.25 m
Bow door 197 -2.29 m 0.15 m
_______________________________________________
In the above case, the fully loaded ship capsizes
due to the stability loss.
5.2.2 In the state of reduced DWT, the extent of damage is
as follows
Penetration: inboard 4.80 meters, flooded volume:
2 757.9 m
3
.
Table 8. Floating conditions
_______________________________________________
Draught Trim Heel GM
Aft Midships Forward
_______________________________________________
8.09m 6.08 m 4.06 m - 4.06 m 0.9 deg 1.39 m
_______________________________________________
Table 9. Stability parameters
_______________________________________________
Maximum righting arm (max. GZ) 0.05 m
Heel angle at maximum righting arm 5.0 deg
Range of the GZ curve 7.4 deg
_______________________________________________
Table 10. Critical openings distance to the waterline
_______________________________________________
Frame Distance Reduction of distance
No. to the to the waterline
waterline per degree of heel
_______________________________________________
Stern door - 6 -6.37 m 0.08 m
Door 3 rd. Deck 50 1.33 m 0.21 m
Bow door 197 3.61 m 0.07 m
_______________________________________________
In this case of damage, the ship in state of reduced
DWT has a small stability margin, but she will float in
equilibrium position. The stability is however not
sufficient to comply with the criteria of SOLAS’90.
5.3 The case of major penetration in fore part of the ship
This case is presented in Figure 9
Figure 9. The case of Major penetration in fore part of the
ship. [1, 4]
432
5.3.1 Intact condition for the fully loaded ship are as
follows: Mean draught = 5.75 meters, intact
Metacentric height GMo = 1.53 meters
Damaged compartments Permeability [%]
_______________________________________________
4 WB tank 0.95
3B Dry tank 0.95
3A Dry tank 0.95
The extent of damage is as follows: Frames: 121 –
175, Penetration: inboard 4.80 meters, Flooded
volume: 2 727.4 m
3
.
Table 11. Floating conditions
_______________________________________________
Draught Trim Heel GM
Aft Midships Forward
_______________________________________________
4.91m 6.82 m 8.73 m 3.81 m 0.0 deg -0.68 m
_______________________________________________
Table 12. Stability parameters
_______________________________________________
Maximum righting arm (max. GZ) 0.00 m
Heel angle at maximum righting arm 0.0 deg
Range of the GZ curve 0.0 deg
_______________________________________________
Table 13. Critical openings
_______________________________________________
Frame Distance Reduction of distance
No. to the to the waterline
waterline per degree of heel
_______________________________________________
Stern door - 6 3.08 m 0.08 m
Door 3 rd. Deck 50 2.84 m 0.21 m
Bow door 197 -0.68 m 0.07 m
_______________________________________________
In this case the fully loaded ship will capsize due
to the stability loss.
5.3.2 Intact condition for the Partly loaded ship: Mean
draught = 5.40 meters, intact Metacentric height
GMo = 1.83 meters
Extent of damage is as follows: Penetration:
inboard 4.80 meters, Flooded volume 2 508.5 m
3
.
Table 14. Floating conditions
_______________________________________________
Draught Trim Heel GM
Aft Midships Forward
_______________________________________________
4.66m 6.35 m 8.03 m 3.37 m 0.0 deg 0.04 m
_______________________________________________
Table 15. Stability parameters
_______________________________________________
Maximum righting arm (max. GZ) 0.00 m
Heel angle at maximum righting arm 1.0 deg
Range of the GZ curve 1.7 deg
_______________________________________________
Table 16. Critical openings distance to the waterline
_______________________________________________
Frame Distance Reduction of distance
No. to the to the waterline
waterline per degree of heel
_______________________________________________
Stern door - 6 3.32 m 0.08 m
Door 3 rd. Deck 50 3.20 m 0.21 m
Bow door 197 0.00 m 0.07 m
_______________________________________________
In this case of damage, the ship in state of reduced
DWT will capsize due to the stability loss.
5.4 The case of penetration in midship, below the main
cargo deck This case is presented in figure 10
Figure 10. The case of penetration into the midship’s
compartments. [1, 4]
5.4.1 Intact condition for the ship state of maximum
DWT are as follows: Mean draught = 5.75 meters,
intact Metacentric height GMo = 1.53 meters
Damaged compartments Permeability [%]
_______________________________________________
6 Dry tank 0.95
The extent of damage is as follows: Damage
between the frames: 91 – 121, Penetration: inboard
4.80 meters, Flooded volume: 1 385.4 m
3
.
Table 17. Floating conditions
_______________________________________________
Draught Trim Heel GM
Aft Midships Forward
_______________________________________________
6.03m 6.23 m 6.43 m 0.40 m 0.1 deg 0.89 m
_______________________________________________
Table 18. Stability parameters
_______________________________________________
Maximum righting arm (max. GZ) 0.12 m
Heel angle at maximum righting arm 9.0 deg
Range of the GZ curve 13.1 deg
_______________________________________________
Table 19. Critical openings distance to the waterline
_______________________________________________
Frame Distance Reduction of distance
No. to the to the waterline
waterline per degree of heel
_______________________________________________
Stern door - 6 1.87 m 0.08 m
Door 3 rd. Deck 50 2.51 m 0.21 m
Bow door 197 1.48 m 0.07 m
_______________________________________________
In this case of damage, and in state of maximum
DWT, the ship has a good stability. She will float in
equilibrium position. The stability complies with the
criteria of SOLAS’90’ .
5.5 Intact condition for the ship with the reduced DWT
are as follows: Mean draught = 5.40 meters, intact
Metacentric height GMo = 1.83 meters
Extent of damage is as follows: Penetration:
inboard 4.80 meters, Flooded volume 1 316.7 m
3
.
Table 20. Floating conditions
_______________________________________________
Draught Trim Heel GM
Aft Midships Forward
_______________________________________________
5.68m 5.86 m 6.04 m 0.36 m 0.1 deg 1.05 m
_______________________________________________
433
Table 21. Stability parameters
_______________________________________________
Maximum righting arm (max. GZ) 0.19 m
Heel angle at maximum righting arm 11.3 deg
Range of the GZ curve 16.6 deg
_______________________________________________
Table 22. Critical openings distance to the waterline
_______________________________________________
Frame Distance Reduction of distance
No. to the to the waterline
waterline per degree of heel
_______________________________________________
Stern door - 6 2.21 m 0.08 m
Door 3 rd. Deck 50 2.87 m 0.21 m
Bow door 197 1.87 m 0.07 m
_______________________________________________
The ship in state of reduced DWT has a good
stability, and will float in equilibrium position. The
stability complies with the criteria of SOLAS ’90.
6 CONCLUSIONS
Results of the damage stability calculations, presented
in this paper are getting knowledge of risk in practice
of Ro-Ro/ Passenger ship’s exploitation. This type of
ships, with open un-subdivided cargo decks, is losing
the stability in case of damage very easy.
The damage stability calculations, presented
above, are giving a clear image of risk when some of
the ship’s compartments have been damaged.
It should be noted very clear, that in case of
damage the Ro-Ro/Passenger ship in state of reduced
DWT, and Minor penetration, has much better chance
for float in equilibrium position with a small stability
margin, than in case when the ship is fully loaded ,
with maximum DWT, having the same damaged
compartments.
The Major penetration in case of damage of the Ro-
Ro/Passenger ship resulting always as the stability
loss.
If the ship’s floating condition and stability are
calculated, a question arises if the damaged condition
is sufficiently safe. In some cases the answer is simple:
if a ship sinks, it is no longer safe. When staying
afloat, the amount of submersion or list, and the
residual freeboard has to be stated.
The results of the calculations witch has been
presented above, are giving the proof of the
significance of simplified stability information for the
Master and tools for fast verification: if the Ro-Ro /
Passenger ship sinks, or staying afloat.
Stating that in state of reduced DWT the Ro-
Ro/Passenger ship has much better chance to survive
in case of damage than the ship in state of maximum
DWT , the important advise should be noted.
When the extremely bad weather, and sea state
conditions are predicted for the sea passage of the Ro-
Ro/Passenger ship, it is better to have this ship in state
of reduced DWT than in state of maximum DWT. The
above is in connection with the accelerations, which
are extremely high in fore and after part of the Ro-
Ro/Passenger ship, and may cause the damage of
cargo lashing, and shifting of vehicles during the bad
weather. As the effect of the above, the ship is missing
the stability. Due to the above, there is a practical
advice to reduce the number of vehicles loaded in fore
and after part of main deck and on higher deck, in
order to reduce destructive effect of the high value
acceleration, and to get the partly loaded conditions of
the ship.
The process of the development of safety
regulations pertains the construction of bulkheads,
watertight doors in lower deck, watertight of
ventilation channels, construction of longitudinal
bulkheads, installation of monitoring systems for
critical openings, systems of monitoring for leakage in
cargo decks, systems of fast drainage of lower vehicle
decks.
Damage stability calculations are made during the
ship’s design phase, but they are limited to a number
of cargo conditions. In the design phase it is
impossible to predict all load variations that occur
throughout the exploitation of the ship. By law, a ship
in all conditions must satisfy the damage stability
requirements. This means, that the loading conditions
may not be exactly as it was in the design calculations.
In practice there are two solutions:
1 1. Every ship has a table or diagram of maximum
allowable KG in damage conditions.
2 2. A specialized computer software provides
instructions for captain in every imaginable or real
situation .
The results presented in this paper were
performed by using the certified vessel’s software for
loading and stability calculations according to SOLAS
2009 and STOCKHOLM Agreement (1996), taking
into account the imaginable reduced value of DWT or
fully loaded Ro-Ro / Passenger ship, with maximum
DWT.
REFERENCES
1. Loading Manual of Ro-Ro / passenger ship:
unpublished.
2. Resolution MSC.267 (85): Adoption of the
International Code on Intact Stability. (2008).
3. Simopoulos, G., Konovessis, D., Vassalos, D.:
Sensitivity analysis of the probabilistic damage
stability regulations for RoPax vessels. Journal of
Marine Science and Technology. 13, 2, 164–177
(2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00773-007-0261-x.
4. Szymoński, M.: Some Notes on Risk and Safety
Evaluation of Ro-Ro Passenger Ships Exploitation.
In: European Navigation Conference (ENC). IEEE,
Warsaw, Poland (2019).
https://doi.org/10.1109/EURONAV.2019.8714157.
5. Vassalos, D., Papanikolaou, A.: Stockholm
Agreement—Past, Present, Future (Part 2). Society
of Naval Architects. 39, 3, 137–158 (2002).
