Maritime Questions › Engineering / Technical
A maintenance checklist requires the second engineer to consult the vessel's fuel piping drawings and identify every valve or circuit needing isolation. He marks the item complete. What does NTSB's investigation suggest about relying on this checklist alone?
A. A completed checklist item is reliable proof the underlying check was performed correctly
B. A completed checklist item only proves a box was ticked — the fire showed the drawing review likely didn't happen in enough depth to catch the backflow path
C. Checklists are unnecessary if the engineer has enough experience
D. The checklist failure is irrelevant since the fire was caused by an electrical fault, not the checklist
Sign in or create a free account to see the answer and explanation.
A. Only that the pump has been switched off
B. That the engine logbook has been updated first
C. Nothing extra — thermal oil drains are routine and can be opened immediately
D. That the system has cooled and depressurised, and you are positioned clear of the drain point's discharge path
Sign in or create a free account to see the answer and explanation.
A. Treat the gap as a hazard in its own right: apply a suitable cooling/depressurising period and full PPE before proceeding, and raise the procedure gap with the Chief Engineer
B. Delegate the task to a junior rating without further briefing, since the procedure covers it
C. Skip the task until a class surveyor is on board
D. Follow the procedure exactly as written — if it doesn't mention cooling or PPE, they're not required
Sign in or create a free account to see the answer and explanation.
+305 more Engineering / Technical questions available
Create a free account to practise all 308 questions, track your accuracy, and build your Reputation Score.
Create Free Account