The following case study is from CHIRP Maritime’s Superyacht Feedback. It is the first superyacht-specific programme and publication dedicated to improving safety in the maritime industry through vital knowledge sharing, anonymous reporting, analysis and feedback via the Superyacht Maritime Advisory Board.

Initial report
Our reporter had recently joined a vessel during construction. They had read several CHIRP reports that mentioned the need to wear a harness when working at height, so they made a point of checking if their vessel had enough ‘pad eyes’ (strong points) in the right places on their vessel so that a crewmember could work aloft in safety once the vessel was operational.

In their opinion, more pad eyes were needed but when they raised this with the shipyard, they were told that the design had been approved by the owner, the architects and the classification society, so they saw no need to make a change.

CHIRP comments
Once a design is approved, getting shipyards to implement changes becomes nearly impossible due to the high costs and complexity of the reapproval process, which inevitably delays delivery schedules. Additionally, since shipyards often construct multiple vessels based on the same design, the absence of a formal feedback loop from operational vessels back to the architects and classification society results in future hulls having the same deficiencies, too. It is therefore imperative that architects seek and incorporate the experiences of operators alongside the wishes of the owner during the design process.

CHIRP urges all authorities involved in superyacht design to consider the safety implications for crew and passengers from the outset and to introduce a formal feedback process so that experiential learning can be incorporated into future hull builds.

Owners, classification societies and Flag states should actively participate in this process during the design phase. Similarly, crews must provide feedback to the Flag states regarding design issues. In this context, our reporters have offered an excellent example of active involvement in operational safety for the crews working on superyachts, and CHIRP wants to thank them.

Factors related to this report
Culture: A calculative rather than proactive safety culture prevails. The owners do just enough to meet essential compliance. Would your superyacht benefit from installing additional safety features, particularly when working at height?

Local practice: Just because a superyacht design is built with limited securing points does not mean it cannot be reconfigured to incorporate additional safety features.

Communications: Do you have your say on safety design? Is there engagement with the Flag state, the classification society and the designers?

To register to CHIRP or submit your feedback, please click here.

Profile links

CHIRP Maritime

Click here to become part of The Superyacht Group community, and join us in our mission to make this industry accessible to all, and prosperous for the long-term. We are offering access to the superyacht industry’s most comprehensive and longstanding archive of business-critical information, as well as a comprehensive, real-time superyacht fleet database, for just £10 per month, because we are One Industry with One Mission. Sign up here.