HSE Health & Safety
Executive
Use and operation of daughter craft in the UKCS
Prepared by MaTSU Ltd for the Health and Safety Executive 2005
RESEARCH REPORT 307
HSE Health & Safety
Executive
Use and operation of daughter craft in the UKCS
JK Robson, MNI MaTSU
Harwell International Business Centre Didcot
Oxfordshire OX11 0QJ
Daughter craft (DC) operate from emergency response and rescue vessels (ERRV) on the UKCS. Since their introduction in the 1990s the craft have seen progressive incremental development in terms of their design and operation. In parallel with this, the regulatory framework under which they operate has also been adapted. Using a datum point of October 2002, the technical specifications, similarities and differences between DC are discussed in detail and inferences drawn from the analyses. The development of DC based on their changing role is also discussed.
Recent changes in the provision of stand by cover as a result of the Jigsaw project has created a quantum leap in both the DC philosophy and the regulatory regime. It is likely these changes will be matched by future developments in the areas of crew training and certification.
This report and the work it describes were funded by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE). Its contents, including any opinions and/or conclusions expressed, are those of the authors alone and do not necessarily reflect HSE policy.
HSE BOOKS
Crown copyright 2005
First published 2005
ISBN 0 7176 2932 5
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be
reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in
any form or by any means (electronic, mechanical,
photocopying, recording or otherwise) without the prior
written permission of the copyright owner.
Applications for reproduction should be made in writing to:
Licensing Division, Her Majesty's Stationery Office,
St Clements House, 2-16 Colegate, Norwich NR3 1BQ
or by e-mail to [email protected]
ii
CONTENTS
1 INTRODUCTION 1
2 METHODOLOGY 3
3 REVIEW FINDINGS 5
HISTORY OF THE DC 5
CONVENTIONAL ROLE OF DC 6
DEVELOPMENT OF ROLES FOR DC 13
WORK BY PROMARINE 17
ANALYSIS OF DC SPECIFICATIONS 17
ANALYSIS OF DC AND THEIR ERRV 18
ANALYSIS OF DC AND THEIR LOCATION 20
REGULATORY FRAMEWORK FOR DC 21
DC OPERATOR CONSIDERATIONS 22
FUTURE DEVELOPMENTS 25
APPENDIX 1 TECHNICAL DATA FROM THE PROMARINE DC
STUDY (2001) 27
APPENDIX 2 TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS OF COMMON
DAUGHTER CRAFT 33
APPENDIX 3 REQUIREMENTS FOR LOAD LINE EXEMPTION 45
APPENDIX 4 ALBUM OF DAUGHTER CRAFT IN ACTION 46
iii
iv
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Since the earliest days of offshore oil and gas exploration in the UKCS smaller rescue craft have been
operated from emergency response and rescue vessels (ERRVs). Such rescue craft are much faster and
more manoeuvrable than the mother vessel and can provide rapid response and intervention, especially
where in-water survivors need to be recovered.
The role was originally fulfilled by fast rescue craft (FRC) and in many cases they are still used today,
but since the early 1990s larger and most robust rescue vessels were introduced and have operated
semi-autonomously from the mother vessel. These craft, termed daughter craft (DC), enjoy many of the
benefits of FRC in terms of their rescue and recovery capability. Moreover, DC design, construction
and size enables the craft to stay at sea for longer and offers the crew/passengers a more protected and
stable environment.
In more recent years DC design and operation has continued to evolve. Although their primary activity
is and is likely to remain the rescue and recovery of persons in an emergency, DC are seen as having the
potential to undertake other roles such as providing close standby for helicopter operations or the
transportation of small items to or between installations.
DC currently operate under the Load Line Exemption regulatory framework and limits are placed on
their maximum range from the mother vessel, duration of time in the water and maximum significant
wave height for operation. These limits to operability are likely to be superseded in the near future when
they may be covered by the Maritime and Coastguard Agencys Small Commercial Vessel Code.
Bearing all these changing factors in mind, the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) commissioned
MaTSU to review the development of the DC, provide an overview of current DC activities and assess
potential future developments.
Initially the study undertook a literature review and in large part used the outcome from a parallel HSE
study that gathered together detailed technical specifications of DC and their mother vessels currently in
operation on the UKCS. Other activities included face to face interviews with all ERRV operators that
use DC as part of their fleet, a site visit to a DC manufacturer and meetings with the MCA to discuss
the current and future regulatory regime in respect of DC.
Despite the extensive nature of the literature search the amount of detailed information was found to be
limited. However, when the results were overlaid with technical information from the complementary
study it was then possible to develop a good appreciation of how DC have evolved on the UKCS in
terms of their design, construction, propulsion and fitment.
In parallel with the evolution of the DC themselves, their role and the training of their crews has also
had to develop. DC crew are now specially trained to carry out their duties and this results in high levels
of skill, motivation and pride among those selected for DC crews. Coxswains require further training in
the wider range of communications facilities and navigational skills, particularly for the larger and
better equipped DC that in future may operate at greater distances from the mother vessel and yet retain
LLE certification.
With the possible move towards regulation under the Small Commercial Vessel Code further training
and certification will be required depending on the area category under which the craft will operate. At
the forefront of development will be the imminent introduction of autonomous rescue and recovery craft
(ARRC) as part of BPs Jigsaw project. Due for delivery in 2005, the ARRCs design specification
calls for craft of 18.8m in length, a range of 400 miles at 20 knots and maximum speed of 34 knots.
v
Coupled with this is a launch capability in up to 7m Hs and a capacity of 57 survivors. There are
precedents for vessels of a similar size to operate in equally arduous weather conditions; the Dutch
KNRM and RNLI Arun class lifeboats are similar in a number of respects. A major difference,
however, is that these vessels are not intended for launch and recovery via twin falls davits from another
vessel and this aspect remains to be proven through trials.
The introduction of the ARRCs could be seen as an extension of the DC concept, which itself may lead
to further development in the designs of smaller DC and an expansion of their operational capabilities.
As has been shown when used in offshore activities and by national rescue organisations around the
world, DC and those craft similar to them are fast, effective tools for marine rescue in all but the more
extreme weather conditions.
vi
1 INTRODUCTION
Daughter craft (DC) have seen increasing use as stand-by, rescue and recovery cover for offshore
oil and gas platforms on the UKCS. This has arisen from the requirement for larger and more
robust craft for the more remote and exposed platforms, as well as the industry driven move to
provide cover for closely deployed installations (e.g. in the Southern North Sea) by using craft
that were more independent of their mother vessel than the conventional fast rescue craft (FRC).
In many respects DC enjoy many of the benefits of FRC in terms of their rescue and recovery
capability. They can attain high speeds, are manoeuvrable and can be launched/recovered from
the mother vessel quickly. DC design, construction and size enables the craft to stay at sea for
longer and offers the crew/passengers a more protected and stable environment.
Even though the primary activity of DC is, and is likely to always remain, the rescue and
recovery of persons in an emergency1, DC are seen as having the potential to undertake other
roles such as providing close standby for helicopter operations or the transportation of small
items to or between installations. While doing so they can also act as rescue craft whilst the
personnel undertake their duties on these installations. This offers potentially large cost savings
compared to the usual combination of transfer by helicopter and provision of rescue cover by an
emergency response and rescue vessel (ERRV)2. To place this into context, as an example of how
the introduction and evolution of the DC concept has helped to rationalise in-field activities in the
southern North Sea (SNS), in one particular field before DC were available, up to 12 ERRV
were deployed to support a field of multiple installations whereas afterwards the same cover was
afforded by 2 ERRV with their DC.
Recognising the evolutio
