FIRESAFE II Findings on Open Ro-Ro and Weather-Deck Detection

FIRESAFE II — the EMSA-commissioned follow-up research programme on ro-ro fire safety — tested multiple detection technologies on open ro-ro and weather-deck environments. The headline findings are not surprising, but the granular data on where each technology fails is worth reading carefully.

What the programme tested

• Conventional point smoke detectors.
• Aspirating smoke detection (ASD).
• Linear heat detection (LHD), including fiber-optic.
• Flame detectors (IR, UV).
• Thermal imaging cameras.

Where each technology broke down

• Point smoke detectors: defeated by airflow on open decks, false trips from diesel exhaust.
• ASD: better than point on open decks, still defeated by high ventilation rates.
• LHD (fiber-optic): consistent winner on open decks — coverage continuous, immune to airflow effects.
• Flame detectors: late by definition (only see Stage 3+), nuisance from welding and sunlight.
• Thermal cameras: line-of-sight constrained, lens contamination in service.

What it implied for detection-layer design

For open decks, the FIRESAFE II findings support fiber-optic LHD as a primary with point sensors as a complement. For enclosed decks (where FIRESAFE II is less directly relevant), the same logic — distributed sensing as primary, point sensors as backup — applies, but the distribution mechanism is per-vehicle thermal cells rather than fiber.