I am distressed by the number of ships being built with crew accommodation forward. The new Maersk ships are the last straw.
The design of these is in flat contradiction of the Maritime Labour Convention 2006, of which Title 3, Standard 3.1.6 (c) states: 'In ships other than passenger ships, as defined in Regulation 2 (e) and (f) of the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea, 1974, as amended (the SOLAS Convention), sleeping rooms shall be situated above the load line amidships or aft, except in exceptional cases; where the size, type or intended service of the ship renders any other location impracticable, sleeping rooms may be located in the fore part of the ship, but in no case forward of the collision bulkhead.'
Why, on any of these new ships, is it an 'exceptional case' or 'impracticable' for the accommodation to be midships or aft, when thousands of similar ships have been so built over the last few decades? Just what are the flag administrations and their class society advisors thinking?
Colin Wright
A version of this letter was previously published in Ships Monthly magazine
More letters
Warm QM2 welcome for Cunard war veteran
Knowing that we would be marking the 80th anniversary of VE Day this year, I was honoured recently to meet a Merchant Navy veteran of the Second World War.
New addition to Hull historic trail celebrates maritime education
On 27 March 2025 at 12 noon, the Old Boys of the Hull Trinity House School Association and the Hull Trinity House Brethren held a ceremony to celebrate the work of Hull Trinity House School over more than two centuries.
Same old story on seafarer safety
I was watching a recent programme on BBC1, Why Bridges Collapse, about the MV Dali container vessel hitting the bridge at Baltimore. The part where they were taking the bridge's trusses off the bow of the vessel I found quite illuminating.