Control room design - tell the designers what you want and the required functionality

During a recent visit to the P&O cruise ship MV AURORA, we were able to see and hear of some of the simple problems of equipment layout, accessibility and functionality that could have an effect on operability and manoeuvrability, both on the bridge and in the machinery control room.

During a recent visit to the P&O cruise ship MV AURORA, the editor - accompanied by Mr Richard Vie, Vice President Technical Development and Quality Assurance, Corporate Shipbuilding, Carnival Corporation &plc. - was able to see and hear of some of the simple problems of equipment layout, accessibility and functionality that could have an effect on operability and manoeuvrability, both on the bridge and in the machinery control room.

This is not one of the newest ships in the P&O Fleet but generally the bridge layout, including bridge wing controls is well thought out; and the machinery control room layout is simple, but effective. But, like all such systems, there is room for improvement.  This is a 76,152 GRT ship with an overall length of 270.0 metres and moulded beam of 32.2 metres, which is powered by two STN AEG propulsion motors driving two propellers. Unusually, the propellers are inward-turning, which is not the best configuration in terms of manoeuvrability, but this is a trade off in favour of passenger comfort because it reduces noise and vibration.

However, the ship is also blessed with 3 powerful bow thrusters and a stern thruster which makes her capable of being manoeuvred alongside in 25 to 30 knot winds in waters where there is a draft limitation of 8.5 metres. It is clear, therefore, that some consideration has been given to ship manoeuvrability.

In terms of the controls and instrumentation on the bridge, their layout accessibility and functionality are generally well-considered, but for some niggling differences in system functionality between different manufacturers. For example, on the bridge wing control panels, there are as many as 4 different dimmer switches and a number of different ‘shades of red’ warning lights which, according to Richard Vie, demonstrates that even an Integrator will source items of equipment from different manufacturers such that they cannot be truly integrated.

Following a discussion about the value of analogue instruments versus digital, the Master explained that he preferred the bridge deckhead mounted panoramic rudder angle indicator rather than the front panel-mounted version, and the digital rate of turn indicator (which gave him a much better indication of rate of turn) than the analogue version.

One glaring error in terms of accessibility is the internal communications panel at the officer of the watch’s position, where the officer of the watch has to lean over at a considerable angle to operate this system – which demonstrates the importance of accessibility.

The Carnival Group has embraced the concepts of Bridge and Engine Room Resource Management but BRM/ERM is very much about building a team and properly using the resources available to that team to operate the ship. However, it does not teach the operators how to understand and properly use the technology.

Richard Vie recognised the inevitability of changing technology and that every ship that comes into service is different. In the case of the older ships, obsolescence is a serious issue, not least with regard to replacement systems. He concedes that it is not hard to keep up with these changes but they do create more and more software issues, which may not be known to the operator, who has implicit faith in that software

There was very little to see in the machinery control room, other than a number of desk mounted display screens and the water mist fire extinguishing control panel. The Chief Engineer explained the importance of ‘line of sight’ visibility of the various monitors and of the water mist control panel, together with proper alarm management.

What of the future? Richard Vie explained that the Carnival Group were investigating the design of standardized bridges and machinery control rooms. “But,” he says, “it could potentially increase costs and the key to optimum bridge and control room design will be in SMART procurement – which, in short, means not specifying any particular type of equipment but telling the designers what you need in terms of user requirements and the required functionality of the systems they will operate.”

The editor wishes to thank Mr Richard Vie and the Master and Chief Engineer of MV AURORA for their contributions to this article.