When ships commanded by experienced officers collide or run aground, the industry response is often to treat it as an anomaly rather than examine the conditions that made it possible. Certification standards were met, sea time requirements were satisfied and the officers involved were qualified professionals. It is comforting to believe these incidents are anomalies rather than warnings. Yet collisions involving experienced crews continue to occur. Experience at sea builds judgement, but preventing collisions ultimately depends on how ships are operated continuously.
Sea time remains one of the most important foundations of maritime safety. Time spent onboard exposes officers to real operating conditions, develops judgement, and builds familiarity with the complexities of ship handling and navigation. Experience at sea cannot be replaced by classroom instruction alone.
However, sea time does not automatically reveal how consistently standards are upheld during day-to-day operations.
Experience is undeniably valuable, but it is not the same as sustained performance under pressure. A master with 20 years at sea is still operating in real-world conditions where fatigue, distraction, and workload fluctuate. At three in the morning in congested waters, with multiple navigation displays active, radio traffic ongoing, and commercial expectations in the background, judgment is shaped by far more than the months listed on a CV.
When casualty investigations are examined closely, they rarely reveal a lack of knowledge. What they tend to find instead is that a course alteration was delayed, an assumption was left unchallenged, or a developing situation was not reassessed quickly enough. These are not dramatic failures of competence but lapses in judgment and execution that occur in complex environments. It is important to highlight that modern bridges are significantly more demanding than they were a decade ago. Traffic density has increased along key routes, navigation systems have become more sophisticated and digital information flows have expanded. Officers are expected not only to navigate safely but also to manage reporting obligations, compliance requirements, and near-constant communication with shore. The bridge has evolved into a highly connected operational space where multiple inputs compete for attention simultaneously.
Human cognitive capacity, however, has not evolved at the same pace. Attention remains limited and the ability to manage competing demands has natural limits. Experience helps prioritise information, but it does not eliminate fatigue or overload. Repetition builds familiarity, but it does not remove the variability of human performance.
This is where reliance on sea time as the primary measure of safety becomes problematic. Duration is straightforward to measure and audit, which can create a sense of assurance that does not always reflect operational reality. If accumulated months at sea were sufficient on their own to prevent serious incidents, experienced officers would not continue to be involved in collisions. The fact that they are suggests that time served is not, by itself, a safeguard against error.
The industry has traditionally relied on audits, inspections and investigations to maintain standards. These mechanisms remain essential. Their limitation is that they occur after the event.
By the time a casualty report is written, the behaviours and decisions that contributed to the incident may have been developing gradually over many voyages.
If the industry wants to reduce collisions further, it must look beyond officers’ tenure and examine how bridges are actually operated during routine operations.
As vessels become more connected and operational demands continue to grow, the industry would benefit from asking a more direct question. Are we relying on duration because it is convenient to measure, or are we prepared to look more closely at how ships are actually run, watch after watch, long before an incident forces that scrutiny?
Sea time builds experience. What ultimately determines safety is how ships are operated under real-world conditions. If collisions involving experienced officers continue to occur, the question is not how many months have been logged at sea, but how consistently ships are operated watch after watch. Tags: BulkContainerGas CarrierTanker
