Skip to main content

Crew Size and Maritime Safety (1990) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:

Appendix E: Previous Research on Shipboard Task Analysis
Pages 126-131

The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.


From page 126...
... used task lists, operations sequence charts and multiple activity tables, qualified by ships' visits and shipboard interviews to validate their findings. Some empirical data were used in the study, primarily preliminary Navy preventive maintenance system (PMS)
From page 127...
... Williams used two vessels the SS American Lancer and the MV Sugar Islander as baseline vessels, and performed task analyses using multiple activity charts to determine deck engine and steward department manning levels. Williams calibrated his engine department findings with preventive maintenance system (PMS)
From page 128...
... Boatswain 3 ABs 2 OSs 1 Chief Engineer 2 Assistant Engineers 2 QMEDs 1 Wiper 1 Chief Steward 1 Chief Cook 1 Cook/Baker 3 Messmen 2 Utility Men TOTAL 11 6 8 25 * Additional manning reductions (to 22 people)
From page 129...
... This cooperative program between the government and PGM used organizational and work assessment techniques- interviews, meetings, questionnaires, organizational analyses, time and motion analyses, daily activity logs, and "day in the life of" sessions to determine PGMs shipboard and shoreside work planning, work distribution, equipment maintenance, and requisite manning. Denny recommended maintenance of the present ship's complements of 20 personnel, and recommended institution of an onboard maintenance department, development of a shipboard management team, a combined navigation/communications watch (eliminating the need for a radio officer in the future)
From page 130...
... The Bridge 9/one-man watch navigational performance (measured by deviation from a centerline course) was found to be superior to the other two bridge designs evaluated; path width remained within safe limits 95 percent of the time, in contrast to the two-handed conventional bridge, which resulted in safe path widths only 50 percent of the time.
From page 131...
... Manning issues were one piece of the analysis, and were integrally tied to the bridge designs tested. Schuffel determined that a single-manned, advanced technology bridge was safer and more efficient (as measured by the trackkeeping and mental workload parameters)


This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More information on Chapter Skim is available.