1

THE EUROPEAN PASSENGER CAR FERRY FLEET –

REVIEW OF DESIGN FEATURES AND STABILITY CHARACTERISTICS OF
PRE- AND POST SOLAS 90 RO-RO PASSENGER SHIPS

Apostolos Papanikolaou, Professor, Head of Ship Design Laboratory, National Technical University
of Athens, papa@deslab.ntua.gr

Eleftheria Eliopoulou, Dipl.-Eng., Dr.-Eng. Cand., Ship Design Laboratory, National Technical
University of Athens, eli@deslab.ntua.gr

SUMMARY
This paper presents an analysis of systematically collected technical data of Ro-Ro Passenger ships
operating mainly in European waters. The data were derived from collaborative work within the EU-
projects SAFER-EURORO [1] and ROROPROB [2] as well as from independent work of NTUA-SDL.
The developed technical database enables a systematic analysis of collected data and a variety of
conclusions on past, presently adopted and foreseeable practices in Ro-Ro Passenger Ship Design
pertaining to various main ship characteristics, with emphasis on ship stability and safety.

1. INTRODUCTION
The Ro-Ro concept is a very popular and efficient mode of transportation especially in Europe, where
50% of the world’s Ro-Ro shipping fleet operates.

From the economical point of view, the capability of carrying simultaneously a wide variety of cargoes
with minimum infrastructure and shore-based equipment make the particular ship type most
competitive. In terms of safety/stability, the vulnerability of large vehicle spaces creates a serious
stability and floatability problem in case of flooding due to collision or other incidents leading to car
deck flooding (e.g., bow door opening).

A significant part of the presented work is within the scope of the EU funded project ROROPROB [2],
aiming at developing and implementing a new formalized design methodology for optimal subdivision
of Ro-Ro Passenger ships based on the probabilistic damage stability approach.

2. TECHNICAL DATABASE
The present RORO Technical Database serves as a comprehensive and stand-alone reference of
European Ro-Ro Passenger Ferry fleet of unique technical content and extent of collected data. It
currently includes data of 780 European ships of the following types: Passenger/Car Ferries,
Passenger/Train/Car Ferries, Vehicle Carriers, Ro-Ro Cargo ships. With respect to the Passenger/Car
Ferries, the database is considered to be fully representative of the present status of the entire European
Passenger/Car ferry fleet.

2.1 DATABASE STRUCTURE

The database has been developed under MS Access 2000. The registered data refer to available
information on the following ship characteristics:
!"General characteristics of the vessels (name, former names, owner, flag, area of operation, class,
crew, builders, year of build, year of major modifications).
A. Papanikolaou, E. Eliopoulou, ‘The European Passenger Car Ferry Fleet – Review of Design Features And Stability
Characteristics Of Pre- and Post SOLAS 90 Ro-Ro Passenger Ships’, Euroconference on Passenger Ship Design,
Contruction, safety and Operation, Anissaras-Crete, October 2001
 2

!"Main technical characteristics, such as main dimensions, lightship weight, displacement and
payload, powering, life saving equipment.
!"Special devices such as: propellers, rudders, thrusters, stabilizers, sponsons, stern/bow doors.
!"Information on intact stability and loading conditions.
!"Basic subdivision below and above main car deck.
!"Damage stability information on worst case (equilibrium and values of residual stability)
!"Stability standard currently in compliance as well as the next relevant regulation to be in
compliance.
!"Severe Casualties Records.
!"Outline of general arrangement.

2.2 DATABASE ANALYSIS

The following analysis has been carried out with respect to category Ro-Ro Passenger/Car Ferries and
attempts to relate technical and global economic ship characteristics to their stability and eventually
safety. The sample of analysed data contains 498 ships and is given in Table 1.

Average Min - Max Sample

Length Over All m 126.95 33.02 - 214.9 497
Length Between Perpendiculars m 116.51 28.01 - 198 486
Breadth Moulded m 20.19 6.66 - 32 472
Depth to the Main Deck m 7.03 1.99 - 12.6 269
Draught m 5.14 1.25 - 8.22 486

Deadweight t 2716 39 - 15500 476

Lightship t 6904 317 - 21800 252
Displacement t 9465 196 - 25300 264

Gross Register Tonnes 12437 198 - 59912 498

Speed kn 18.98 8 - 31 478
Total Power of Main Engines HP 16772 456.3 - 90500 496

Year of Built 1980 1952 - 2001 497

Year of Mod/cation of Major Char. 1990 1971 - 2000 80

Table 1: Sample of analysed Passenger/Car Ferry data

For the study, a major breakdown into two main categories has been considered, namely: sample of
ships built before 1990 and ships built after 1990, Figure 1. This breakdown was essential, firstly
because of the change of design philosophy in the last decade and secondly because of the request for
compliance with higher stability standards after the introduction of SOLAS 90. Further categorizations
have been also considered such as: ships built after 1993 or 1997, in order to have more clearly the
possible effect of the SOLAS 90 and SOLAS 95 requirements and of more recent technological
developments. Note however, that in some of these category cases, the differences are not significant,
compared to the overall post-1990 results. Additionally, in some other cases, the sample data are not
considered satisfactory, due the limited number of registered ships in those categories, in order to
conclude with certainty. Finally, the analysis of data considers a categorisation with respect to the
different stability standard in compliance for the entire sample of registered ships.

A. Papanikolaou, E. Eliopoulou, ‘The European Passenger Car Ferry Fleet – Review of Design Features And Stability
Characteristics Of Pre- and Post SOLAS 90 Ro-Ro Passenger Ships’, Euroconference on Passenger Ship Design,
Contruction, safety and Operation, Anissaras-Crete, October 2001
 3

post-1997
Sample of 497 ships
1993-1996 9%
8%
1991-1992
5%

pre-1990
78%

Figure 1: Distribution of sample acc. to Year of Built

3. REVIEW OF RESULTS

3.1 SIZE OF VESSELS

The last decade has witnessed a continuous increase of the size of vessels and additionally higher
service speeds and powering requirements, leading to a new generation of Ro-Ro Passenger Ferry
designs and reflecting the increasing demand for faster, more comfortable and safer sea transport,
Figure 2 and Figure 3.
pre
pre1990
1990 post
post1990
1990 post
post1993
1993 post
post1997 pre
1997 pre1990
1990 post
post1990
1990 post
post1993
1993 post
post1997
1997
180
180 40000
40000
160
160 35000
35000
140
140 30000
30000
HP
RT,HP

120
120
knots

25000
meters,knots

25000
tonnes,RT,

100
100
20000
20000
meters,

80
80
tonnes,

15000
15000
60
60
18.4
18.4 23.7
23.7 10000
10000
40
40
20
5000
5000
20
00
00
Loa
Loa Lbp
Lbp Breadth
Breadth Dmain
Dmain Draught
Draught Speed
Speed DWT
DWT LS
LS Displ.
Displ. GT
GT Power
Power

Figure 2: Averages of main dimensions and speed Figure 3: Mean weights, tonnage & powering

3.2 DIMENSIONAL RATIOS & COEFFICIENTS

!"L/B ratio: there is no clear trend of the particular ratio. Analysis based on different Lbp
categorisation indicates that the ratio decreases for ships built post-1990, especially in the range of
Lbp up to 160m. This reflects the relative increase of beam for achieving the enhanced stability
standards. On the other hand, length is a major parameter greatly affecting the building cost, but it
also depends on harbour and route limitations.

A. Papanikolaou, E. Eliopoulou, ‘The European Passenger Car Ferry Fleet – Review of Design Features And Stability
Characteristics Of Pre- and Post SOLAS 90 Ro-Ro Passenger Ships’, Euroconference on Passenger Ship Design,
Contruction, safety and Operation, Anissaras-Crete, October 2001
 4

Ships of Lbp Ships of Lbp Ships of Lbp Ships Built Ships Built Ships Built
L/B L/B
100-130m 130-160m >160m post 1993 post 1997 post 1993
Pre 1990 5.0 - 7.4 4.7 - 7.4 5.8 - 7.4 4.9 - 7.4 4.9 - 7.4
Post 1990 4.9 - 6.9 5.0 - 6.7 5.3 - 7.4 Vs ≥24 5.1 - 7.4

!"B/T ratio: Clearly increasing for the new vessels, an indication of increased stability requirements.
Draft remains constant or slightly decreasing (shallower ships) for enabling docking of large ferries
at existing port infrastructure and accounting for restricted draft routings.
Ships of Lbp Ships of Lbp Ships of Lbp Ships Built Ships Built Ships Built
B/T B/T
<130m 130-160m >160m post 1993 post 1997 post 1993
Pre 1990 2.9 - 4.9 2.9 - 4.6 3.3 - 4.7 3.2 - 4.9 3.6 - 4.9
Post 1990 3.6 - 4.9 3.7 - 4.6 3.2 - 4.7 Vs ≥24 3.6 - 4.6

!"T/D ratio: The T/D ratio is of particular importance for the damage stability, because of its direct
relation to the ship’s intact (and damage) freeboard. It is notable that this ratio obviously decreased
(indicating increased freeboard), Figure 4.

Ships built with enhanced stability standard have a T/D ratio within the range of 0.67-0.76.
Regarding ships that are modified to comply with the enhanced regulations, i.e. SOLAS 90+WOD,
high T/D ratios are due to external or/and internal modifications such as sponsons, ducktails,
barriers, etc.
All Ships SOLAS 90 std, F=0.5
SOLAS 90+WOD, modified Linear (All Ships)
Linear (SOLAS 90 std, F=0.5)

0.90

0.85

0.80
T/D

0.75

0.70

0.65

0.60
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220
Lbp (m)

Figure 4: T/D ratio acc. to stability standard

!"Block Coefficient: typically increased, in the average, indicating increased hull form efficiency in
terms of space and floatability requirements, Figure 5. Regarding pre-1990 results, there is a wide
spread of the analysed data, Figure 6.
y =All Vessels+w/o
-0.0731x spns-(1)
0.6964
Ships post-1990
30000 0.80 R2 = 0.0426
y = 628.44x + 186.13 Alexander's Formula (k1=1,08)
R2 = 0.9841 0.75
25000
0.70 Alexander's Formula (k2=1,05)
Ships pre-1990
Displacement (t)

20000
0.65 Ships Built after 1990

15000 Ships post-1990

Cb

0.60
Linear (Alexander's Formula
0.55 (k1=1,08))
10000 Linear (Ships pre- Linear (Alexander's Formula
0.50
1990) (k2=1,05))
5000
0.45 Linear (All Vessels w/o spns-(1))
Linear (Ships post-
A. 0
Papanikolaou, E.Eliopoulou, ‘The European1990)
Passenger Car
Ferry Fleet – Review of Design Features And Linear
0.40 Stability
(Ships Built after 1990)
0 10 20 30 40 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4
Characteristics Of Pre- and Post SOLAS 90 Ro-Ro Passenger Ships’, Euroconference on
V(kn)/[L(ft)]0.5
Passenger Ship Design,
Contruction, safety andLBT/1000
Alexander's (k1) Alexander's (k2)
Operation, Anissaras-Crete, October 2001 y = -0.5x + 1.08 y = -0.5x + 1.05
 5

Figure 5: Displacement vs. (LBT/1000) Figure 6: Cb vs. V/ L

With respect to the minimum values of block coefficients, a notable point is that some registered
values of abt. 0.45 for some older ships now disappeared.
Ships Built Ships Built Ships Built
Cb
post 1993 post 1997 post 1993
0.54 - 0.72 0.56 - 0.65
Vs ≥24 0.56 - 0.65

!"Powering and related coefficients: The coefficient of the English Admiralty, Cn, reflects the
hydrodynamic efficiency of the ship’s hull form. It can be noted that vessels built post-1990 have
improved hydrodynamic efficiency, Figure 7, despite the fact that operational speeds (Froude
numbers) and the block coefficients are in the average higher.
For ships built post-1993, Cn varies as indicated in the next table.
Ships Built Ships Built Ships Built
Cn
post 1993 post 1997 post 1993
112-312 126-312
Vs ≥24 202-312
For a given speed, the required horsepower per ton displacement of newer ships is less than for the
older ones, Figure 8.
Ships built pre-1990 Ships built post-1990 Pre-1990 (Vs<24 kns) Post-1990 (Vs <24 kns)
Linear (Ships built pre-1990) Linear (Ships built post-1990) Ships with Vs>=24 Kns Linear (Pre-1990 (Vs<24 kns))
Expon. (Post-1990 (Vs <24 kns)) Poly. (Ships with Vs>=24 Kns)
100000
Ships pre-1990
90000 6
y = 0.0043x + 3245.5
Power (HP)/Displaceme

80000 2
R = 0.8234 5
70000
Power (HP)

60000 4
50000
40000 3
30000 Ships post-1990
20000 y = 0.0037x + 4643.4 2
2
10000 R = 0.9223 1
0
0 5000000 10000000 15000000 20000000 25000000 0
2/3 3 5.0 7.5 10.0 12.5 15.0 17.5 20.0 22.5 25.0 27.5 30.0 32.5
Δ *V
Speed (kns)

Figure 7: Power vs. [(Displacement2/3 * Speed3) Figure 8: (Power/Displacement) vs. Speed

Figure 9 shows the installed main engines horsepower per passenger for ships carrying more than 1000
passengers.
50
y = 2.9534x - 46.712
2
45 R = 0.8607

40

35

30
Pass >1000
HP/Pass

25 Pass >1000 (post 1990)

Linear (Pass >1000 (post 1990))
20

15

10

0
10 12.5 15 17.5 20 22.5 25 27.5 30 32.5

A. Papanikolaou, E. Eliopoulou, ‘The European Passenger Car Ferry Fleet – Review of Design Features And Stability Speed (knots)

Characteristics Of Pre- and Post SOLAS 90 Ro-Ro Passenger Ships’, Euroconference on Passenger Ship Design,
Contruction, safety and Operation, Anissaras-Crete, October 2001
 6

Figure 9: HP/Passengers vs. Speed

3.3 MAIN DIMENSIONS

For the estimation of the main dimensions in the conceptual design stage, some formulae were deduced
by regression analysis of the collected relevant data, Figures 10 and 11.
All Vessels Ships Built after 1990 All Vessels Ships Built after 1990
Power (All Vessels) Power (Ships Built after 1990) Power (All Vessels) Log. (Ships Built after 1990)

35 11
All Vessels All Vessels
10
0.7142 0.6794
30 y = 0.6775x y = 0.2746x
2 9 2
R = 0.861 R = 0.833
25 8

Depth (m)
Bmld (m)

7
20
6

15 5
Ships post-1990 S hips post-1990
4
0.6544 y = 4.7465Ln(x) - 15.365
10 y = 0.9245x
2 3 2
R = 0.8706
R = 0.8399
2
5
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
0 40 80 120 160 200 240

Lbp (m) Lbp (m)

Figure 10: Main Dimensions vs. Lbp

All Vessels Ships Built after 1990
All Vessels Ships Built after 1990
Linear (All Vessels) Power (Ships Built after 1990)
Power (All Vessels) Power (Ships Built after 1990)
9.0
All Vessels 30000
8.0 y = 0.029x + 1.802 All Vessels
2
7.0 R = 0.7657 25000 y = 0.064x
2.4505

2
R = 0.9377
Draught (m)

6.0
Displacement (t)

20000
5.0
15000
4.0
Ships post-1990
3.0 10000
y = 0.2758x
0.617 S hips post-1990
2.0 2.3653
2
R = 0.8361 y = 0.0992x
5000 2
1.0 R = 0.8904
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 0
Lbp (m) 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
Lbp (m)

Figure 11: Draught, Displacement vs. Lbp

3.4 DISTRIBUTION OF WEIGHTS

Lightship Weight & DWT: For given main dimensions, a vessel built pre-1990 appears to dispose a
larger weight of lightship compared to the newer ones. Focusing on the post-1990 ships, lightship is
increasing for post-1997 in comparison to ships built in 1990-1996, Figure 12.
From another point of view, the required compartmentation to meet higher stability standards, leads to
an increase of lightship weight due to the additional structural weight, proportional to the number of
fitted bulkheads, Papanikolaou et al (2000), Figure 13.
Ships pre-1990 Ships 1990-1996 Ships post-1997
Power (Ships pre-1990) Power (Ships 1990-1996) Linear (Ships post-1997)
S hips with lower hold

20000
14000
18000
A. Papanikolaou,
16000 E. Eliopoulou, ‘The European Passenger Car Ferry13000
Fleet – Review of Design Features And Stability
Euroconference on Passenger Ship Design,pre-1993
Characteristics Of Pre- and Post SOLAS 90 Ro-Ro Passenger Ships’,12000
14000
Lightship (t)

12000 11000 post-1993

Contruction, safety and Operation, Anissaras-Crete, October 2001
LS (t)

10000
10000 Linear (p re-1993)
8000
9000 Linear (p ost-1993)
6000
4000 8000
2000 7000
0
10 12 14 16 18 20
 7

Figure 12: Lightship vs. LBDu/1000 Figure 13: Lightship vs. # of basic transverse
watertight compartments
The DWT/Δ ratio vs. DWT and speed as parameter is presented in Figure 14. Commenting on this
figure it should be remembered that vessel speeds continuously increased, leading to an increase of
powering and related machinery weights. However, some increase of machinery weights could be
counterbalanced though the introduction of novel machinery units of reduced weight per installed HP.
Ships with Vs>20 kns Ships with Vs>=24 Kns
Ships with Vs<=15 kns Ships with Vs=15-20 kns
Linear (Ships with Vs>20 kns) Linear (Ships with Vs=15-20 kns)

0.50
0.45
0.40
0.35
DWT/Δ

0.30
0.25
0.20
0.15
0.10
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000
DWT (t)

Figure 14: DWT/Displacement vs. DWT

3.5 PAYLOAD

Lanes’ length/Lbp ratio: The ratio of the car lanes’ Length/Lbp has significantly increased for the
newer ships, indicating the higher efficiency of modern designs. Vessels built before the year 1990
dispose an average ratio of 7.3, whereas those built after 1990 have a 60% higher ratio of 11.6. For a
given deck waterplane area, ships post-1990 can accommodate a larger number of lane meters than the
older ones, Figure 15.

In domestic, coastal voyages, service speeds have been kept at normal levels because it is either
impossible by environmental conditions or non-economical to take full advantage of the higher service
speeds, Figure 16.
All Vessels Ships Built after 1990 cruise type
50
Power (All Vessels) Power (Ships Built after 1990)
45 Short International
4000 40
Ships Built after 1990 International
y = 0.0936x
1.2026 35
HP/Passengers

3000 2
R = 0.829 30
Domestic
Lanes Length (m)

25
2000 20
Linear (Short
15
International)
10
1000 Linear (International)
5
0
0
50 1050 2050 3050 4050 5050 6050
10 15 20 25 30 35

Lbp * Bmld Speed (Kns)

A. Papanikolaou, E. Eliopoulou, ‘The European Passenger Car Ferry Fleet – Review of Design Features And Stability
Characteristics Of Pre- and Post SOLAS 90 Ro-Ro Passenger Ships’, Euroconference on Passenger Ship Design,
Contruction, safety and Operation, Anissaras-Crete, October 2001
 8

Figure 15: Lanes Length vs. Lbp * Bmld Figure 16: HP/Passengers vs. Speed, per voyage
type

3.6 COMPARTMENTATION BELOW MAIN CAR DECK

The introduction of the longitudinal bulkhead concept inside the B/5 line has changed thoroughly the
philosophy of design of the internal compartmentation below the main car deck. As a result, the
considerable floodable volumes below car deck have been reduced, especially for shallow damages.
The majority of older ships have only transverse bulkheads (TB), as a standard subdivision, to the
greater extent of their length, though in newer ships the combination of transverse and longitudinal
bulkheads (LB&TB) is a common feature, except for the relatively small ships, Figure 17.
21
70 All Ships

# of watertight compartment
60 19
SOLAS 90
50
Number of ships

17
SOLAS 90+WOD by
40 Older Ships modifications
15
30 Newer Ships Linear (All Ships)

20 13
Linear (SOLAS 90)
10 11
Linear (SOLAS 90+WOD
0 by modifications)
9
TB LB&TB
50 70 90 110 130 150 170 190 210
Type of design Length (m)

Figure 17: Distribution of type of internal Figure 18: Number of watertight compartment
compartmentation below main car deck vs. Length

The length of primary transverse watertight compartments has been reduced for the newbuildings (and
accordingly the number of WT compartments increased) to meet the higher damage stability standards,
Figure 18.

In order to utilise the space below the main car deck, as this space cannot be used for accommodation
purposes by the latest SOLAS regulations, large lower hold decks inside B/5 line are adopted in new
concepts, that in some cases might be exceeding even 50% of ship’s length, Figure 19.
0.60 All Vessels Ships built post1993
0.55 24
0.50
LLowerHold/Lbp

Length of Main E.R.(m)

Older Ships 20
0.45
Newer Ships
0.40 16
Linear (Older Ships)
0.35
Linear (Newer Ships) 12
0.30
0.25 8
0.20
4
20 40 60 80 100
0 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000 60000 70000
LLowerHold (m)
Power (HP)

Figure 19: Lower hold Length/Lbp vs. Lower Figure 20: Length of Engine Room vs.
hold Length installed power

A. Papanikolaou, E. Eliopoulou, ‘The European Passenger Car Ferry Fleet – Review of Design Features And Stability
Characteristics Of Pre- and Post SOLAS 90 Ro-Ro Passenger Ships’, Euroconference on Passenger Ship Design,
Contruction, safety and Operation, Anissaras-Crete, October 2001
 9

Although these large non-divided spaces under main car deck are considered intact in typical SOLAS
damage conditions, there might be the cause of serious stability problems in cases of actual penetration
beyond B/5, if not properly arranged.

The length of engine room appears to become shorter, for given installed power, Figure 20. This is
attributed to the consideration of novel machinery arrangements and the use of more compact
machinery units.

3.7 INTACT STABILITY

Freeboard is an essential parameter affecting the stability and safety of ships both in intact and damage
condition. A comparison of the intact freeboards between vessels of different stability standard shows
that SOLAS 90 2-compartment standard and A.265 ships dispose comparable and in general larger
intact freeboard heights, Figure 21.
3.50 SOLAS 74
3.25 SOLAS 60
3.00
SOLAS 90/92, F=0.5
2.75
A. 265
2.50 90/92
SOLAS 74/*, SOLAS
FB (m)

2.25 74 88
FB acc. To ILLC
2.00
Ships modif. 90+WOD
1.75 Modified as
90+WOD Linear (SOLAS 74)
1.50
1.25 Linear (SOLAS 90/92,
F=0.5)
1.00 60 Linear (SOLAS 60)

0.75 Linear (FB acc. To

ILLC)
60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Linear (Ships modif.
Lbp (m) 90+WOD)

Figure 21: Intact Freeboard vs. Lbp

Note that intact freeboards for the larger new ships are close to and over 2.5 m, what clearly calls for
the provision of new docking facilities in some European ports, currently adjusted to freeboards in the
range of 1.5 to 2.0m.

Enhanced stability standards clearly require greater GM values, Figure 22. This should generally affect
ship’s sea kindness, as ships become stiffer in roll and passengers might experience higher transverse
accelerations. However, this negative effect of GMt on seakeeping is commonly counteracted by the
employment of stabilising fins and of antirolling tanks.
GMt versus Breadth/FB
Intact Condition
5.0
4.5
4.0
3.5
All Ships
3.0
GMt (m)

SOLAS 90 std
2.5
SOLAS 90+, modified
2.0
1.5 Linear (All Ships)
1.0
0.5
0.0
5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19
Breadth/FB

A. Papanikolaou, E. Eliopoulou, ‘The European Passenger Car Ferry Fleet – Review of Design Features And Stability
Characteristics Of Pre- and Post SOLAS 90 Ro-Ro Passenger Ships’, Euroconference on Passenger Ship Design,
Contruction, safety and Operation, Anissaras-Crete, October 2001
 10

Figure 22: Intact GM vs. Breadth/Intact Freeboard

3.8 DAMAGE STABILITY

Newer vessels have obviously improved damage stability characteristics due to their compliance with
the enhanced damage stability criteria of SOLAS 90 and SOLAS 90+WOD, Figure 23.
4.5
SOLAS90
4.0
3.5 SOLAS 74-60
3.0
GMres (m)

SOLAS90+WOD,
2.5
sponsons
2.0 Linear (SOLAS90)
1.5
1.0 Linear (SOLAS 74-60)

0.5
100 120 140 160 180 200
Lbp

Figure 23: Distribution of residual values of GM

3.9 POSSIBLE IMPACT OF STOCKHOLM AGREEMENT TO SHIPS OPERATING IN SOUTH

EUROPEAN WATERS

A dedicated study on the possible impact of the Regional Stockholm Agreement (SOLAS 90+WOD)
on ships operating in South European waters has been recently carried out jointly by Ship Stability
Research Centre – University of Strathclyde and the Ship Design Laboratory – National Technical
University of Athens [4]. The objective of the particular study was, among others, to establish which
ships operating in EU waters not covered by the Stockholm Agreement need to be upgraded to comply
with the provisions of Stockholm Agreement and the possible extent of required modifications.

The NTUA-SDL Technical Database was used to identify all affected vessels operating in EU waters
along with their relevant technical details. Based on the inventory of the ships under investigation, their
current stability standard of compliance, area of operation (typical operational significant wave height
Hs) and corresponding subdivision index A/Amax values, it was concluded, that the techno-economical
effort for the affected ships to be upgraded to SOLAS 90, two compartment standard will not much
deviate from the effort to formally comply with the provisions of the Stockholm Agreement.

A. Papanikolaou, E. Eliopoulou, ‘The European Passenger Car Ferry Fleet – Review of Design Features And Stability
Characteristics Of Pre- and Post SOLAS 90 Ro-Ro Passenger Ships’, Euroconference on Passenger Ship Design,
Contruction, safety and Operation, Anissaras-Crete, October 2001
 11

In Tables 2, 3 the number of affected South European ships (SEU) and the anticipated dates of
compliance are presented.

Regulation 8-1
Oct 1998 Oct 2000 Oct 2002 Oct 2004 Oct 2005
66 ships Not Affected
19 ships F=1 3 4 3 4 5
54 ships F = 0.5 3 13 16 10 12
14 ships F=1 1 6 5 2
148 ships F = 0.5 33 85 25 5
Total 301 6 51 110 44 24
235 ships affected
Table 2: SEU ships-Compliance with Regulation 8-1

Regulation 8-2
Oct 2006 Oct 2008 Oct 2010 Oct 2011 Oct 2012
1 1 9
4 9 1
2 1 1
7 10 10 1 1
29 ships affected

Table 3: SEU ships-Compliance with Regulation 8-2

The total modification cost for the whole South European fleet was estimated to range between a
minimum of 106,325 k EURO and a maximum of 249,722 k EURO, depending on the finally adopted
modification option (sponsons, ducktails, casings, buoyant tanks, cross-flooding, additional
subdivisions and internal barriers on car deck, etc.).

4 HELLENIC FLEET
Focusing on the characteristics of the Hellenic Fleet (national and international voyages), a significant
improvement regarding the renewal of ships can be observed, Figure 24. Considering the data of year
2001, the average age of the Hellenic fleet has been reduced to 21 years, being practically today
identical to the average age of the entire European Passenger Car Ferry Fleet, Table 1.

Hellenic PCF Fleet Hellenic Fleet - International Voyages

Distribution of Age
Hellas-2000 Hellas-2001
Average of Year of Built (2000) = 1977 (98 ships)
Average of Year of Built (2001) = 1980 (107 ships) >=26 years Average of Year of Built = 1989
70
26%
60
up to 5 years
50
% of Fleet

42%
40
30
20
21-25 years
10 13%
0
16-20 years
up to 5 6-10 years 11-15 16-20 21-25 >=26 years 6-10 years
0% 11-15 years
years years years years 13% Sample of 31 ships
6%

Figure 24: Distribution of Hellenic PCF Fleet Figure 25: Distribution of Year of Built-
International
A. Papanikolaou, E. Eliopoulou, ‘The European Passenger Car Ferry Fleet – Review Voyages
of Design Features And Stability
Characteristics Of Pre- and Post SOLAS 90 Ro-Ro Passenger Ships’, Euroconference on Passenger Ship Design,
Contruction, safety and Operation, Anissaras-Crete, October 2001
 12

Note that according to relevant Hellenic Law, the upper limit of age for Ro-Ro Passenger ships
operating in Hellenic waters (domestic voyages) was until very recently 35 years. However this limit
was recently reduced to 30 years with an expected significant impact on the existing domestic fleet in
the years to come. Regarding the Hellenic ships operating in international waters, it should be noted
that 42% of this part of the Hellenic Fleet has an age of up to 5 years and the overall average age of the
Hellenic international fleet is merely 11 years, clearly below the overall European Fleet average, but
also below the average age of the North European Fleet, standing at about 17 years acc. to the study
[4], Figure 25.

About 85% of the Hellenic Fleet has two-compartment standard of subdivision, Figure 26. Regarding
the one-compartment standard ships, 9% of them must have already proceeded for upgrade with
SOLAS 90, Regulation 8-1, though a significant part, namely 46%, has still time until October 2005,
Figure 27. These ships must also proceed for compliance with Regulation 8-2 (two-compartment
standard) at later dates.

Regarding vessels with two-compartment standard of subdivision, 18% of them must have already
proceeded to actions for compliance with SOLAS 90 Reg. 8-1 or they must have taken proper action to
increase their A/Amax values in order to postpone the dates of compliance. Part of this category of
ships, namely 26%, is placed under the EUROSOLAS provisions, Figure 28.???????

Distribution of Factor of Subdivision

Hellenic PCF Fleet
F=1
15%

F=0.5
85% Sample of 81 ships

Figure 26: Distribution of Factor of Subdivision

Hellenic PCF Fleet Hellenic PCF Fleet

Distribution of A/Amax (Dates of Compliance), Distribution of A/Amax (Dates of Compliance),
S hips with F=1 S hips with F=0.5

Sample of 11 ships < 85% (1998) Sample of 62 ships

< 85% (1998) 85%-90%
EURO SO LAS 3% 85%-90%
0% (2000) EURO SO LAS
0% (2000)
9% 27%
15%
90%-95%
> 97.5% (2002)
(2005) 27% 90%-95%
46% (2002)
18%

95%-97.5% > 97.5% 95%-97.5%

(2004) (2005) (2004)
18% 26% 11%

Figure 27: Distribution of A/Amax value, Figure 28: Distribution of A/Amax value,
Ships with F=1 Ships with F=0.5

A. Papanikolaou, E. Eliopoulou, ‘The European Passenger Car Ferry Fleet – Review of Design Features And Stability
Characteristics Of Pre- and Post SOLAS 90 Ro-Ro Passenger Ships’, Euroconference on Passenger Ship Design,
Contruction, safety and Operation, Anissaras-Crete, October 2001
 13

5 CONCLUSIONS

Decisions in the early ship design stage strongly depend on the designer’s expertise and knowledge
from the past, but also on the knowledge of ‘state of the art’ technological developments.

Technical ship data to the extent collected herein in a systematic manner are rare, though considered
essential in the conceptual-preliminary design stage, that is the stage in which major technical and
economic ship characteristics are determined following the owner’s requirements and statement of
work.

The collected data can be not only exploited in the conceptual design stage, but also for the
crosschecking the data of individual designs under consideration. Also, the derived regression
formulae might be useful in the set-up of a computer-aided optimisation procedure, as planned in the
EU funded ROROPROB project.

The present analysis shows significant changes in the design of pre- and post SOLAS 90 ships and also
in the demand of passenger shipping market. These changes reflect not only changes in safety policy,
leading to stricter safety regulations, but also changes in the shipbuilding technology through
innovation. As a result, new ships appear to be safer, at increased efficiency and economy.

The enhanced safety requirements and the increased open market demands, especially after the
complete lift of the ‘cabotage’ regulation in some South European countries, including Greece, will
accelerate the renewal of the European Ro-Ro passenger ferry fleet and especially of the South
European Fleet.

6 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The work, presented in this paper, was partly supported by the EU-projects SAFER-EURORO (C.N.
BRRT-CT97-5105) and ROROPROB (C.N. G3RD-CT-2000-00030) and the dedicated EU-DG VII
study CN B99-B2702010-S12.144738. The authors are solely responsible for opinions expressed in this
paper and the European Commission is not responsible for any use of the data appearing herein in any
form.

7 REFERENCES

1. SAFER EURORO Ship Design Team, “Technical Database of European Ro-Ro Passenger Ship”,
NTUA-SDL Report, European Community – DG XII, Brussels, 2000.

2. ROROPROB, “NTUA-REP-T1.3.2&3-D9-D10”, European Community – DG XII, Brussels, 2001.

3. Papanikolaou A., Eliopoulou E., Kanerva M., Vassalos D., Konovessis D., “Development of a
Technical Database for European Passenger Ship”, Proc. IMDC 2000 Conference, Korea, 2000.

4. “IMPACT ASSESSMENT OF STOCKHOLM AGREEMENT”, SSRC-US & NTUA-SDL

Partnership, NTUA-REP-PART B-2000, European Community – DG VII, CN B99-B2702010-
S12.144738, 2000.

A. Papanikolaou, E. Eliopoulou, ‘The European Passenger Car Ferry Fleet – Review of Design Features And Stability
Characteristics Of Pre- and Post SOLAS 90 Ro-Ro Passenger Ships’, Euroconference on Passenger Ship Design,
Contruction, safety and Operation, Anissaras-Crete, October 2001
 14

A. Papanikolaou, E. Eliopoulou, ‘The European Passenger Car Ferry Fleet – Review of Design Features And Stability
Characteristics Of Pre- and Post SOLAS 90 Ro-Ro Passenger Ships’, Euroconference on Passenger Ship Design,
Contruction, safety and Operation, Anissaras-Crete, October 2001