RISQ Q10.12 requires heaving line "monkey's fists" to be made of rope only, with a strict 0.5kg maximum weight limit if a soft pouch alternative is used, and explicitly prohibits weighting with shackles, bolts, nuts, or twist locks. Why does this specific, low weight limit matter enough to be a distinct inspection point?

A. This requirement applies only to heaving lines used in port, never to those used for ship-to-ship operations

B. A heaving line is thrown toward shore personnel or another vessel's crew at some velocity, and a weighted monkey's fist heavy enough to cause serious injury (a documented real hazard — heaving lines weighted with hard metal objects have caused real injuries and at least one fatality) defeats the line's purpose of safely initiating a mooring connection without becoming a projectile hazard itself

C. Heavier monkey's fists are always preferred for reliability in poor weather, and the 0.5kg limit is a recommendation rather than a real safety control

D. The weight limit exists purely to standardise the line's flight distance, with no connection to personnel injury risk

A. Setting the brake below 100% MBL reduces the winch's holding power below what is needed for any realistic mooring scenario

B. The 60%/50% figures exist purely as a margin for measurement inaccuracy in the brake-testing equipment, with no relationship to mooring line failure modes

C. These percentages apply only to wire mooring lines and have no relevance to synthetic fibre lines

D. A brake set close to the line's full breaking strength would allow tension to build to a level where the line itself becomes the failure point under shock loading — by rendering (slipping) at a safe margin below MBL, the winch brake fails in a controlled, less violent way (paying out line) rather than allowing the mooring line to part suddenly, which is a genuinely more dangerous failure mode (snap-back) for personnel nearby

A. This guidance only applies to tails used with wire mooring lines, never with synthetic fibre lines

B. Tail strength has no relationship to system compliance or shock absorption in mooring operations

C. A higher TDBF always improves every aspect of mooring system performance with no trade-off whatsoever

D. Mooring tails are designed to be the more elastic, compliant component of the system, absorbing shock loading through stretch — making the tail progressively stiffer/stronger reduces this elasticity ("compliance"), meaning shock loads that the tail would otherwise absorb get transmitted more directly to the rest of the mooring system instead, which can increase rather than decrease the risk of failure elsewhere