Interpretation of causation factors in IWRAP - Revision history

Oferiks at 08:46, 13 May 2012

2012-05-13T08:46:19Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:46, 13 May 2012
Line 15:		Line 15:

	{\| style="color: black; background-color: #ffffcc;" width="100%" class="wikitable"		{\| style="color: black; background-color: #ffffcc;" width="100%" class="wikitable"
	!~~Accident~~ type		!Incident type
	!Scenarios and Interpretation of causation factor (PC)		!Scenarios and Interpretation of causation factor (PC)
	\|-		\|-
Line 97:		Line 97:

	\|}		\|}
	*Footnote (1) To be precise, only the omission of changing course of the ship in the inner curve is critical. If the ship in the outer curve forgets to turn, the two ships do not end up on collision course.
	*Footnote (2) See [1], page 28.

	== Interpretations of causation factors - Powered grounding scenarios. ==		== Interpretations of causation factors - Powered grounding scenarios. ==
Line 109:		Line 108:


	{\|~~border~~="1" ~~cellpadding~~="5" ~~cellspacing~~="0"
	!~~Accident~~ type		{\| style="color: black; background-color: #ffffcc;" width="100%" class="wikitable"
	!~~Scenario~~		!Incident type
	!Interpretation of causation factor (PC)		!Scenarios and Interpretation of causation factor (PC)
	~~!Remarks~~
	\|-		\|-
	\|Category I grounding		\| style="width: 15%;"\|'''Category I grounding'''
	\|		\|'''Scenarios:'''

	# On a leg segment, the ship would run aground, if sailing exactly as defined by the lateral distribution.		# On a leg segment, the ship would run aground, if sailing exactly as defined by the lateral distribution.
	# Ship fails to make evasive actions in order to avoid the ground.		# Ship fails to make evasive actions in order to avoid the ground.
	\|Omitting to avoid ground, in a situation when the ship would run aground if it would do nothing.
	\| IWRAP Mk2 uses the same Pc for both Category I and II		{\| class="wikitable"
			\| '''Interpretation of causation factor (PC):'''

			Omitting to avoid ground, in a situation when the ship would run aground if it would do nothing.
			\|}

			IWRAP Mk2 uses the same Pc for both Category I and II
	\|-		\|-
	\|Category II grounding		\|'''Category II grounding'''
	\|		\|'''Scenarios:'''

	# The ship would run aground, if continuing straight forward after the leg, omitting the waypoint.		# The ship would run aground, if continuing straight forward after the leg, omitting the waypoint.
	# Ship fails to change course at the waypoint.<BR>		# Ship fails to change course at the waypoint.<BR>
	# Ship fails to notice the omitted change of course before running on ground, or notices the omission too late to be able to avoid the grounding.		# Ship fails to notice the omitted change of course before running on ground, or notices the omission too late to be able to avoid the grounding.
	\|Omitting to change course at waypoint.
	\|The ships that notice the omitted turn before running aground are all assumed to be able to avoid the grounding.		{\| class="wikitable"
			\| '''Interpretation of causation factor (PC):'''

			Omitting to change course at waypoint.
			\|}

			The ships that notice the omitted turn before running aground are all assumed to be able to avoid the grounding.

	Another important parameter is the ''Mean time between checks.''		Another important parameter is the ''Mean time between checks.''
	\|}		\|}

			== Footnotes ==
			# To be precise, only the omission of changing course of the ship in the inner curve is critical. If the ship in the outer curve forgets to turn, the two ships do not end up on collision course.
			# See [1], page 28.

	== References ==		== References ==

Oferiks: /* Interpretations of causation factors - Collision scenarios. */

2012-05-13T08:37:51Z