Gemilerin Halat ve Demirleme Manevralarındaki Risklerinin Analizi

Öz

Deniz taşımacılığın başrolünde yer alan gemiler tarafından her seyir operasyonu için en az bir kez limana bağlama ve ayrılma manevrası yapılmakta dolayısıyla halat manevrası bu süreçte devamlı faaliyet olarak yer almaktadır. Yine bu operasyonlarda liman durumuna bağlı olarak demirleme manevrası da icra edilmektedir. Her iki manevra da büyük kuvvetlere ulaşan yükün bindiği donanımların kullanılması nedeniyle, bu manevralar kaza risklerini barındırmaktadır. Bu kapsamda çalışmanın amacı, gemilerin halat operasyonları ve demirleme manevraları sırasında ortaya çıkabilecek riskleri belirlemek, bu risklerin önem derecelerini değerlendirmek ve emniyetli manevra operasyon süreçlerine katkı sağlamaktır. Gemilerin yanaşma, kalkış ve demirleme süreçlerinde meydana gelen kazalar hem can ve mal kayıplarına hem de çevresel zararlara yol açabilmektedir. Bu bağlamda çalışma, denizcilik operasyonlarında insan faktörü, çevresel koşullar ve ekipman kaynaklı risklerin sistematik olarak analiz edilmesini hedeflemektedir. Literatürden ve uygulamalardan yola çıkarak belirlenen risklerin analiz edilmesi amacıyla, denizcilik alan uzmanlarına anket uygulanarak, kazaya yol açan risklerin birbirlerine göre karşılaştırılması AHP yöntemiyle yapılmıştır. Risklerin önlenmesine yönelik olarak seçilen alternatifler ise 4E kuralına göre; A1. Eğitim, A2. Mühendislik, A3. Çevre ve A4. Denetim olarak belirlenmiş ve bu önlemlerin bahse konu risklere yönelik etkisi uzmanlardan anket tekniği ile elde edilen verilere TOPSIS yöntemi uygulanarak tespit edilmiştir. Bu çalışma gemilerde emniyetli operasyon süreçlerine ve risk düzeyi yüksek manevralardan halat ve demirlemeye ilişkin kazaların önlenmesi açısından literatüre katkı sağlamaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Denizcilikte Emniyet
• Halat Manevrası
• Demirleme
• Manevra kazası
• AHP
• TOPSIS.

Risk Analysis of Ship Mooring and Anchoring Maneuvers

Öz

Accidents occurring during ships’ berthing, unberthing, or anchoring operations may cause crew injuries or fatalities, also damage to the ship or pier, and results in environmental pollution. This study aims to identify the risks in mooring and anchoring maneuvers, evaluate their significance, and support safer maneuvering operations. The primary objective is to identify potential risks during mooring and anchoring maneuvers, evaluate their significance levels, and contribute to the enhancement of safe maneuver operational processes. Second is to prioritize the alternatives for prevention this risk categorised to 4E rule as: A1. Education, A2. Engineering, A3. Environment, and A4. Enforcement. The study uses an hybrid model, Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) and TOPSIS (Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution) together. Risk criteria were identified through a literature review, expert consultation, and surveys, and their weights were determined using AHP. TOPSIS was then applied to rank the alternatives for risk mitigation. Data were gathered from surveys and interviews with ship masters, deck officers, and maritime scholars. Results and Conclusions – AHP and TOPSIS methods were utilized together in the analysis process. As a result, although mooring and anchoring maneuvers involve equipment subjected to high forces, the results demonstrate that the human element plays the most critical role in risk mitigation. Personnel education like training e.g. and the verification of these trainings through safety controls during maneuvers-in other words, the concept of enforcement-stand out in risk prevention. Increasing the knowledge and awareness of relevant personnel, from management levels to company executives, through training, along with ensuring the maintenance of equipment, will significantly prevent accident risks. Furthermore, regular monitoring of these issues is beneficial. Future studies are recommended to focus on technology-oriented research regarding the enforcement of behaviors that constitute risks in anchoring and mooring maneuvers.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Maritime Safety
• Mooring
• Anchoring
• Maneuvering Accident
• AHP
• TOPSIS

Kaynakça

1. [1] UN Conference On Trade and Development, “The Review of Maritime Transport”, 2021.
2. [2] Fratila, A., Gavril, I. A., Nita, S. C., & Hrebenciuc, A. (2021). The Importance of Maritime Transport for Economic Growth in the European Union: A Panel Data Analysis. Sustainability, 13(14), 7961. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13147961
3. [3] Jesse M. Lane, Michael Pretes. (2020). Maritime Dependency and Economic Prosperity: Why Access to Oceanic Trade Matters. Marine Policy,121,104180. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2020.104180
4. [4] UNCTAD. (2025). The Review of Maritime Transport. https://unctad.org/publication/review-maritime-transport-2025.
5. [5] Kaptan, M. (2021). Risk assessment of ship anchorage handling operations using the fuzzy bow-tie method. Ocean Engineering, 236, 109500. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2021.109500
6. [6] Kuzu, A. C., Akyüz, E., & Arslan, Ö. (2019). Application of Fuzzy Fault Tree Analysis (FFTA) to maritime industry: A risk. Ocean Engineering, 128-134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2019.03.029
7. [7] Kuzu, Ali. (2023). Application of fuzzy DEMATEL approach in maritime transportation: A risk analysis of anchor loss. Ocean Engineering. 273. 113786 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2023.113786
8. [8] Öztürk, O. B. (2024). A Risk Assessment for Accidents of Ship Mooring Operations from FineKinney Method Perspective. Recep Tayyip Erdoğan Üniversitesi Fen ve Mühendislik Bilimleri Dergisi, 115-125. https://doi.org/10.53501/rteufemud.1475210

9. [9] International Maritime Organization (2025) IMO homepage. [Online]. Available:https://www.imo.org/en/ourwork/safety/pages/safemooring.aspx.
10. [10] Li, H., Zhou, K., Zhang, C., Bashir, M.A., & Yang, Z. (2024). Dynamic evolution of maritime accidents: Comparative analysis through data-driven Bayesian Networks. Ocean Engineering. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2024.117736
11. [11] Sezer, S. I. (2025). A human reliability prediction for ship mooring operational process applying improved Z-number extended HEART approach. Ocean Engineering, 337, 121864. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2025.121864
12. [12] Zhao, C., Zhang, W., Chen, C., Yang, X., Yue, J., & Han, B. (2023). Recognition of Unsafe Onboard Mooring and Unmooring Operation Behavior Based on Improved YOLO-v4 Algorithm. Journal of Marine Science and Engineering, 11(2), 291. https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse11020291
13. [13] Sridhar, I., Akisanya, A. R., Loh, K., & Yeo, S. (2018). Failure analysis of a failed anchor chain link. Engineering Failure Analysis, 89, 258-270. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engfailanal.2018.03.007
14. [14] Tunçel, Ahmet & Sezer, Sukru & Elidolu, Gizem & Uflaz, Esma & Akyuz, Emre & Arslan, Ozcan. (2024). A rule-based Bayesian network modelling under evidential reasoning theory for risk analysis of anchoring operation in maritime transportation. Ocean Engineering. 292. 116521.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2023.116521
15. [15] UK Maritime Accident Investigation Branch (MAIB), “Mooring line failure on board the LNG carrier Zarga resulting in serious injury to a deck officer”, Southampton, UK, Safety Bulletin, 01/15,2015.
16. [16] UK P&I Club, “Risk focus: Moorings”, London, UK, 2016.
17. [17] International Marine Contractors Association (IMCA), “Man overboard from anchor handler tug”, London, UK, 17/22, 2022.
18. [18] International Marine Contractors Association (IMCA), “Mooring rope fouled the propeller and parted”, 17/16, London, 2016.
19. [19] Saaty, T. (1980). The Analytic Hierarchy Process. New York: Mcgraw Hill.
20. [20] Samut, P. K. (2014). İki Aşamalı Çok Kriterli Karar Verme ile Performans Değerlendirmesi:AHP ve TOPSIS Yöntemlerinin Entegrasyonu. Anadolu Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 57-67. https://doi.org/10.18037/ausbd.16327
21. [21] Saaty, T., & Vargas, L. (2012). Models, Methods, Concepts & Application of the Analytic Hierarchy Process. Pittsburg: Springer.
22. [22] Öztürk, D., & Keleş, M. K. (2020). AHP ve TOPSIS Yöntemleri Kullanılarak Motorlu Kurye Seçimi: İlaç Sektöründe Bir Uygulama. Manisa Celal Bayar Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 275-291. https://doi.org/10.18026/cbayarsos.673712
23. [23] Saaty, T. L. (1990). How to Make A Decision: The Analytic Hierarchy Process. European Journal of Operational Research, 9-26.
24. [24] Saaty, T. L. (2008). Decision Making with the Analytic Hierarchy Process. International Journal of Services Sciences, 83-98.
25. [25] Hwang, C., & Yoon, K. (1981). Methods for Multiple Attribute Decision Making. In: Multiple Attribute Decision Making. Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems. Berlin: Springer.