The traditional way of assessing the operational risk of passenger ships is based on the concept of susceptibility and vulnerability to an accident. Such an approach is mainly used to study the possible risk in given operational scenarios, adopting simplified quasi-static methods to assess the vulnerability of the vessel and using empirical definitions for the damage breach modelling. These methods are not employing first-principles methods for the risk evaluation and are not suitable for the development of onboard real-time risk assessment. To this end, developments in the EU-founded project FLARE led to a multi-level risk assessment framework based on first principle methods, that can be applied as a basis for an onboard risk assessment in real-time. The framework for real-time assessment is based on the development of databases for damage locations and dimensions and survivability. Here, the development of a suitable database of damages is discussed, concerning the employment of direct crash simulations with the software SHARP, aiming at developing a database of collisions suitable for a general operational scenario. The resulting database can be used as a data source for the development of a surrogate model for fast application in real time. This paper addresses the application of the process to a reference cruise vessel.

Flooding risk identification is a task always treated within a very narrow scope between the life-cycle of a passenger ship. Therefore, different approaches and methods are available for design, operational or onboard applications. Furthermore, the models employed and proposed solutions use simplified methods based on empirical or probabilistic concepts. One of the aims of the EC-founded project FLARE was to promote the use of first principle methods throughout the whole vessel life-cycle, from the design phase up to the onboard risk management. To this end, this work presents the challenges and potential applicability of a real-time flooding risk evaluation methodology for ship-to-ship collisions, based on first-principles calculations. The possibility to perform direct calculations for survivability allows us to define a multi-level approach to flooding risk, separating Level-1 predictions, purely based on semi-empirical models and databases, from Level-2 predictions based on the concept of Potential Loss of Life (PLL). Here, besides a description of the multi-level risk assessment based on PLL, the different tasks of design and operational phases are addressed. Such issues are then linked to the real-time flooding risk evaluation for onboard applications, potentially working for different hazard types but conceptualised for the case of ship-to-ship collisions. The developed method applied to an arbitrary set of models, shows that the approach and tools employed for creating the framework are suitable for a real-time calculation of flooding risk.

Theory and application of damage stability followed over the years two dissociated paths: static assessments and dynamic simulations. The first approach, being easy to apply and understand, has been preferred by ship designers and regulators; the second, more advanced and first-principle oriented, has been mainly reserved for research or high-level consultancy, especially for passenger ships. Nowadays, the availability of numerical flooding simulation tools across the scientific community and calculation power in the industry allows for a possible definitive transition of damage stability assessment towards direct numerical analyses. However, research should softly drive designers towards more advanced processes via a suitable didascalic calculation framework. The multi-level approach pursued in project FLARE is an example of such a transition from static to dynamic damage stability assessment. The present work initially carefully reviews the probabilistic concept of damage stability, critically comparing the prescriptive statistical methods with direct ones and providing insights and guidance on how researchers and designers can reconcile with the original implicit assumption of the probabilistic approach. Secondly, the development of the multi-level framework highlights incongruences concerning modelling of damages between static and dynamic assessments, disfavouring the comprehension of dynamic results to designers. Two detailed examples highlight the differences in dynamic simulation results between different damage breach modelling, leading to completely different flooding paths for the same damage case. Finally, the paper indicates how a compromise between academic approach and application could help designers to start their transition towards direct numerical damage stability analyses.

Development of damage stability as a scientific subject, specifically in damage ship hydrodynamics and, generally, flooding risk assessment, has evolved primarily by inquisitive academics with support by people with vision and passion towards maritime safety enhancement from industry and Government, the latter in the wake of serious accidents. Notwithstanding this, the subject has seen remarkable development in a short period of time in terms of understanding process, and developing methods and tools for practical implementation of such developments. The stage has now been reached where large-scale EC and industry-funded projects are bringing all requisite knowledge and experience together towards implementation by end users with the view to institutionalizing such developments. The paper critically traces and presents key developments starting from basic concepts to a complete framework for performing numerical simulations of ship survivability in operational conditions in the seaway, leading to flooding risk assessment with application potential for new and existing ships with focus on the design phase but with operation potential in ship operation, the latter involving emergencies.

The damaged stability assessment for a passenger ship is a process requiring the simulation of multiple damage scenarios. Nevertheless, the stochastic nature of the damage stability framework requires the analysis of a statistically significant number of cases. On the other hand, the probability density functions used to estimate the possible damage dimensions and locations along the ship generate many scenarios that are not critical for the ship's survivability, especially for large passenger ships. It is standard to apply empirical rules to restrict the number of damage scenarios, such as critical damages is only above two compartments, considering that damage stability regulations currently in force ensure survivability levels beyond this extent of breaches. However, a rigorous approach is lacking. To this end, in the present work, it is proposed to use more scientific-based methods to identify critical damages. This paper presents three original approaches developed in the context of a multi-level damage stability assessment. The first method relies on preliminary static calculations, the second on the energy absorbed by the ship during an impact, and the third on a purely dynamic approach. Here, the methods are critically compared on two sample passenger ships for collision damages, showing their respective advantages and disadvantages.