199

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Aim and scope

The aim of this paper is to study the efficiency of oil

spill response simulator training. The study is based

on outcomes of two pilot courses conducted in late

2017 and early 2018. The pilot courses comprised of

three days training in maritime simulator centre using

three full-scale navigational bridge simulators and an

oil spill recovery simulator. The participants consisted

of regional oil spill response authorities, both

Efficiency of Maritime Simulator Training in Oil Spill

Response Competence Development

. Halonen & A. Lanki

South-Eastern Finland University of Applied Sciences Xamk, Kotka, Finland

ABSTRACT: Marine oil spill response operation requires extensive vessel manoeuvring and navigation skills.

At-sea oil containment and recovery includes both single vessel and multi-vessel operations. Towing long oil

containment booms, several hundreds of metres in length, is a challenge in itself. Boom deployment and towing

in multi-vessel configurations is an added challenge that requires precise coordination and control of the

vessels. Efficient communication, as a prerequisite for shared situational awareness, is needed in order to

execute the response tasks effectively. In order to gain and maintain adequate maritime skills, practical training

is needed. Field exercises are the most effective way of learning, but especially the related vessel operations are

resource-intensive and costly. Field exercises may also be affected by environmental limitations such as high

sea-state or other adverse weather conditions. In Finland, the seasonal ice-coverage also limits the training

period to summer seasons as regards the vessel operations of the Fire and Rescue Services. In addition, the

sensitiveness of the marine environment restricts the use of real oil or other target substances. This paper

examines, whether maritime simulator training can offer a complementary method to overcome the training

challenges related to the field exercises. The objective is to assess the efficiency and the learning impact of

simulator training, and the specific skills that can be trained most effectively in simulators. This paper provides

an overview of learning results from two oil spill response pilot courses, in which maritime navigational bridge

simulators together with an oil recovery simulator were used. The courses were targeted at Fire and Rescue

Services responsible for near shore oil spill response in Finland. The competence levels of the participants were

surveyed before and after the course in order to measure potential shifts in competencies. In addition to the

quantitative analysis, the efficiency of the simulator training was evaluated qualitatively through feedback

from the participants. The results indicate that simulator training is a valid and effective method for developing

marine oil spill response competencies that complements traditional exercise formats. Simulator training

provides a safe environment for assessing various oil containment and recovery tactics. One of the main

benefits of the simulator training was found to be the immediate feedback the spill modelling software

provides on the oil spill behaviour as a reaction to the response measures.

http://www.transnav.eu

the International Journal

on Marine Navigation

and Safety of Sea Transportation

Volume 13

Number 1

March 2019

DOI: 10.12716/1001.13.01.20

200

management and operational personnel. This study

compares the shifts in competencies estimated by the

means of participant self-evaluation prior and after

the courses. The aim is to examine whether the

simulator training contributes specific oil response

competencies and to find out which competencies

display the most improvement.

1.2 Structure of the paper

This paper is divided into four main chapters. First,

the concept of oil spill response simulator training

and its development process are introduced. Second,

a quantitative analysis of the learning results of two

pilot courses are presented. Third, the effectiveness of

the training is evaluated qualitatively based on the

exercise debriefings and participant feedback. In the

conclusions chapter, the outcomes are summarized

and the efficiency of the maritime simulator training

discussed.

2 DEVELOPMENT OF THE OIL SPILL RESPONSE

SIMULATOR TRAINING

Oil spill response simulator training is a new training

method developed in the South-Eastern Finland

University of Applied Sciences (Xamk) in 2016–2018.

The training differs from the comparable courses due

to the comprehensive simulator training environment

and the joint approach involving both operational and

management level responders. For example, the

simulator training used for the oil spill response

exercising in the Netherlands provides simulation for

the decisions-makers while the simulated vessels are

manoeuvred by the training instructors themselves

(Cross & Werner 2015). The main objective of the

simulator training in Xamk is, by contrast, to use the

bridge simulators to improve the maritime skills of

the responders. The simulator training also utilizes an

entirely new simulator specifically developed for this

purpose; an oil recovery simulator modelling

mechanical brush skimmer operated by excavator

arm either onboard a response vessel or a barge or as

a land-based unit from quayside. Simulators used

were Transas NTPro 5000 version 5.35 navigational

bridge simulator with Oil Spill Functionality module

and Mevea Ltd custom built Oil Recovery Unit with

Lamor Ltd controller. Transas bridge simulators were

used as three (3) full-scale bridges and eight (8)

workstations configuration. Integration of the oil

recovery simulation into maritime simulators creates

a unique learning environment, in which the elements

of the oil spill response operation can be trained

comprehensively (Halonen, Lanki & Rantavuo 2017).

The development of the training courses

commenced with a national study on the current oil

spill response training possibilities and competence

needs (See Halonen, Lanki & Rantavuo 2017). The

objectives of the new training courses were based on

the results of these education and competence surveys

(n=144). Most of the respondents represented the

regional rescue services (n=127) and the study

encompassed 80% of the rescue services in Finland.

Based on the survey results, the courses were built to

focus on the maritime related skills, namely vessel

manoeuvring and navigational skills as well as the

skills related to the marine oil spill response operation

(Halonen, Lanki & Rantavuo 2017). Main training

topics were chosen to include the on-water oil spill

response and recovery tactics and techniques, as well

as conducting the response measures in challenging

operating environments. The training topics were

subjected to expert judgement within advisory

committee meetings where they were accepted. Each

exercise was designed to progressively improve the

skills of the trainees by means of established sub-

objectives. Sub-tasks within the exercises progressed,

for example, from handling a single vessel into

operating response vessels in formations, and from

optical navigation into navigating in restricted

visibility. The training topics are listed in Figure 1 as

well as in Table 1.

In addition to the prior surveys, designing the

training courses aimed to take into account the best

practices that the previous training organizers have

recognized when using traditional exercise formats.

In general, the key elements of a successful oil spill

response training are considered to include a well-

planned establishment of exercise objectives, target-

oriented facilitation as well as formal exercise

debriefing and evaluation. The challenges recognized

are related to costs, weather limitations, health and

safety issues and narrow scope of the training content.

(Leonard & Roberson 1999; Patrick & Barber 2001;

IPIECA & IOGP 2014.) In order to maintain sufficient

training frequency, the restricted resources of time

and personnel are recognized to be the main limiting

factor requiring effective, intensive and low-cost

training solutions (Lonka 1998; Leonard & Roberson

1999; Halonen, Lanki & Rantavuo 2017; Halonen,

Rantavuo & Altarriba 2017). The urge to reduce the

training costs has boosted the use of discussion-based

exercises. However, tabletops, when not facilitated

properly, are found to provide unmeasurable results

(Leonard & Roberson 1999) and blamed of going too

far into exercise artificiality (Gleason 2014) and thus

reducing the training efficiency. The mentioned

challenges include the unrealism of the training

scenarios and the inaccurate assumptions the

discussions-based exercising may cause (Leonard &

Roberson 1999; Patrick & Barber 2001; IPIECA &

IOGP 2014). These challenges that the traditional

exercise formats have demonstrated were taken into

consideration when designing the new simulator

training. In order to evaluate whether the simulator

training can overcome the training challenges, two

pilot courses were executed. The results of the pilot

courses in improving the oil spill response

competency are presented in the following chapter.

3 OUTCOMES OF THE PILOT COURSES

Pilot courses were conducted in November 2017 and

January 2018 in Kotka Maritime Simulator Centre

(KMC) in Finland. The first pilot course had a total of

nine (9) participants, three (3) of which were

management and six (6) operative personnel. The

second pilot course had a total of ten (10) participants,

four (4) of which were management and six (6)

operative personnel. The participants represented six

(6) separate rescue service regions around Finnish

201

coastal and inland water areas, the geographical

coverage encompassing the Finnish south-coast to

Lapland.

The efficiency of the pilot courses was evaluated

by means of quantitative and qualitative analysis. In

the quantitative approach, the improvement of the

competence levels of the participants were surveyed

after the course in order to measure the potential

impact of the training. In addition, the efficiency of

the simulator training was evaluated qualitatively

through the course debriefing discussions and written

feedback from the participants. Both courses had

same contents and the simulator trainings were

executed in a similar way.

3.1 Quantitative analysis of the learning results

The participants of the pilot courses were asked to

evaluate “How much did your competence increase

in a given subject?” The questionnaire consisted of 25

subjects related to the oil spill response (Table 1,

Figure 1). The subjects listed represented the course

topics trained either by the means of the simulators,

theory lessons, integrated tabletop exercises or e-

learning materials for independent study.

Respondents were asked to assess the increase of their

competence in the scale ranging from one (1) to four

(4), where value one (1) equals no shift, value two (2)

equals slight shift, value three (3) equals considerable

shift and value four (4) equals great shift in

competence to an increasing direction. Zero value was

reserved for subjects the respondents consider not

dealt with within the training sessions.

Regarding both pilot courses, when distribution of

all answers were combined, the competencies

displaying the most improvement were found to be i)

vessel manoeuvring, ii) navigation, iii) oil

containment techniques such as booming, iv) use of

radar and v) on-water oil recovery techniques (See

Figure 1). Learning results, indicated by the shifts in

competencies, related to these five topics are studied

next in more detail. The results covering all 25

measured parameters are represented in Table 1.

After the first pilot course the highest positive

values were detected in navigational competence with

upper quintile value of four (4) and lower quintile

value two (2) as seen in Figure 2. All of the top

variables (i–v) had a median values between two

(2/Slight improvement) and three (3/Considerable

improvement).

After the second pilot course the highest positive

values were detected in vessel manoeuvring

competence, with upper quintile value of four (4) and

lower quintile value one (1) as seen in Figure 3. All of

the top variables (i–v) had a median values between

two (2/Slight improvement) and three (3/Considerable

improvement).

Table 1. Summary table of the results in quantitative analysis on the competency shifts in both pilot courses.

__________________________________________________________________________________________________

Topics/skills Pilot Course 1 (n=9) Pilot Course 2 (n=10)

_____________________________________________________________________

Upper Median Lower Mode Upper Median Lower Mode

quantile quantile quantile quantile

__________________________________________________________________________________________________

Oil containment techniques 4 3 1 4 3 3 2,25 3

On-water oil recovery techniques 3 2 2 2 3 3 2,25 3

Response tactics in fast currents 2 2 2 2 3 2 2 2

Response tactics in winter conditions 1 1 1 1 2 1,5 1 0

Shoreline protection techniques 2 2 1,75 2 2,25 2 1 1,2

Onshore recovery and clean-up 2 1,5 1 0, 1 1,25 1 1 1

Sensitive environments 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 0

Sensitive species 1 1 1 1 2,25 2 1,75 0

Use of oil drift models and forecasts 1 1 1 1 2 2 1,75 2

Use of situational awareness systems 1,75 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

Response logistics 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 1

Oil waste logistics 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0

Temporal storing of oily wastes 1,5 1 1 1 1 1 1 0

Managing long-lasting operations 2 1,5 1 0, 1, 2 2 1 1 0

Vessel manoeuvring 4 3 2 3, 4 3,75 3 2,25 3

Use of marine radar 4 3 2 3, 4 3 2 1 1

Navigational skills 4 3 2 2, 3, 4 3 2 2 2

Navigation in restricted visibility 3 2 1 1 2 1,5 1 1

Actions onboard vessel in distress 3 1 1 1 2 1,5 1 1, 2

Exercise design 2,25 1,5 1 1 2 2 1,75 0

Contingency planning 2 2 1,25 0, 2 1,5 1 1 0

Response organisations 2 1,5 1 0, 1 2 1 1 1

Internal communication 2 2 1 1 3 2 1 1

Marine radio communication 3 2 2 2 2 1 1 1

Radio English 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 0

__________________________________________________________________________________________________

* Shift in competence; neutral (1), slight (2), considerable (3) or great (4) improvement, N/A (0).

202

Figure 1. Competency improvements in both pilot courses.

Marked topics (*) were the simulator specific objectives, the

rest were trained by other educational means. Shift in

competence; neutral (1), slight (2), considerable (3) or great

(4) improvement. (n=19).

Figure 2. Quantile competency improvements in five

simulator specific objectives due to the first pilot course.

Shift in competence; neutral (1), slight (2), considerable (3)

or great (4) improvement. (n=9).

Figure 3. Quantile competency improvements in five

simulator specific objectives due to the second pilot course.

Shift in competence; neutral (1), slight (2), considerable (3)

or great (4) improvement. (n=10).

Only subtle differences in competency shifts were

detected when comparing the results of two pilot

courses. The first pilot course showed slightly greater

impact on most of the simulator specific topics than

the second pilot course. The first pilot course led to

better learning results especially in skills related to

the use of marine radar and navigation. Respectively,

the second pilot course led to better learning results in

oil recovery techniques.

Based on the competence shifts, the objectives

subjected to the simulator training unparalleled the

other means of education as seen in Figure 1. The top

five learning results were all achieved by the means of

the simulator training, while the sixth (6.) and 10.-12.

highest learning results were detected in the topics of

the theory lesson. The independent study materials

led to the weakest improvements in competencies.

3.2 Qualitative analysis of the learning results

The simulator training structure included formal

exercise debriefing and evaluation phases, during

which the participants were asked to evaluate the

203

performance and achieved objectives after each

executed session. In addition to that, written feedback

was gathered after the training days. The following

analysis of the training efficiency is based on these

participant inputs.

In the written feedback, the highest valued

exercises were the bridge simulator exercises focusing

on practical response measures; boom deployment,

towing configurations as well as reconnaissance

techniques. Second highest valued was the theory

lesson concerning the use of different response tactics.

(Halonen, Lanki & Punnonen 2018; Rantavuo et al.

2018a.) Comments received in the open question

section were mostly related to the simulation and the

overall objectives of the training. Most commonly

mentioned issue was the training structure utilizing

the opportunity to repeat training scenarios and to

visualize actions taken by means of playbacks. Some

of the exercise missions were repeated several times

in order to allow the participants to test and assess

different response options. This repetition was

considered very useful and instructive, as the field

exercises are usually limited to one experiment at a

time. In addition, most of the field exercises take place

in a fairly good weather, and therefore the possibility

to demonstrate the feasibility of the response options

in different weather conditions was found useful.

Simulation was assumed to contribute identification

of possible operational gaps, as testing the

performance limits of the equipment in real-life is

usually impractical for safety reasons.

Likewise, the respondents emphasized the

significance of the immediate feedback the used

simulation software and models provided. Realism of

the simulator environment, authentic performance of

the vessels and the modelled behaviour of the spilled

oil enabled the understanding of possible impacts the

selected response actions had, and are going to have

in actual emergencies. The participants saw the

exercises demonstrating the detectability of oil on

water, the drifting of oil as well as oil behaviour at

oil/boom -interface very valuable. They stated that, as

the use of real oil is prohibited in field exercises, and

the simulants (such as peat) do not react like oil, it is

usually not possible to get a realistic response to one's

actions. Besides the advantages of the oil modelling,

the expertise of the instructors was also named to be a

key factor in learning to understand causes and

effects. According to the feedback, the significance of

the instructors’ input came most valuable in the

debriefing situations, in which the completed exercise

missions were analysed. Debriefings were also

supported by the means of simulation replays and

recorded aerial view of the scenario. That was

assessed to facilitate also peer to peer communication

and evaluation.

Several participants also mentioned that the

selected target group of multi-level responders was

beneficial. They considered that the simultaneous

involvement of both management level and operative

level fostered collaboration and contributed to the

forming of a more comprehensive outlook. Especially

the possibility for participants to change positions

was considered valuable. (Halonen 2018; Halonen,

Lanki & Punnonen 2018; Rantavuo et al. 2018a.) The

exercise format allowed the executive level

participants to see the immediate implementation of

their response plans, whereas the operative level

participants were able to see the reasoning behind the

assignments. Both participant groups benefitted from

the joint procedures and from achieving a mutual

understanding on the used concepts as well as the

position-related factors contributing to a shared

situational awareness. (Halonen 2018.)

The criticism received was targeted at the technical

features of the simulators. One of the negative aspects

mentioned by the participants was the limitation of

the visual view outwards the simulator bridge

(Halonen, Lanki & Punnonen 2018; Rantavuo et al.

2018a). Bridges in real-life response vessels offer

unhindered visibility in every direction, whereas in

the simulator bridges the visual view covers only 120-

degree sector at a time and needs to be changed

manually. Especially the view astern of the vessel is

important in order to properly see and control towing

apparatus, and the lack of it was considered an

inconvenience. The participants also noted that the

visual determination of dimensions and distances was

more challenging in the simulator environment

(Halonen, Lanki & Punnonen 2018; Rantavuo et al.

2018a). As the bridge simulators utilized in the

trainings are mainly used for STCW-training of

seafarers (Halonen, Lanki & Rantavuo 2017), some

differences compared to the rescue service vessels

were to be expected. Since scale-difference was

assumed to be a potential disadvantage, the

participants were asked to assess the applicability of

the full-scale bridges. The scale-difference, however,

had no effect on the learning results. Although some

specific dimensions, performance and manoeuvring

responses of the vessels slightly differed, it did not

hinder the learning or transfer of the skills, as the

main functionalities, such as the navigation systems,

were corresponding. (Rantavuo et al. 2018b; Halonen,

Lanki & Punnonen 2018; Halonen 2018.)

4 CONCLUSIONS

This paper aimed to examine whether maritime

simulator training can offer a complementary method

to overcome the challenges related to the conventional

oil spill response exercises. The objective was to

assess the efficiency and the learning impact of the

simulator training, and the specific skills that can be

trained most effectively in maritime simulators.

Based on the two experiments, simulator training

is an effective and valid method for developing

marine oil spill response competencies. The results

indicated that the simulator training was efficient

especially in improving the vessel manoeuvring and

navigation skills as well as skills related to oil

containment and oil recovery techniques. Both

separately executed pilot courses yielded similar

results; no meaningful differences in the competency

shifts were detected when comparing the course

specific results. The combined mean values of

improved competences also demonstrated the

efficiency of the simulation as a training method.

Simulator training provided better learning results

than theory lessons and other conventional training

methods (see Figure 1). The applicability of

simulation is based on the ease of repeatability of the

204

training scenarios in order to test different response

options as well as assess procedures and operational

limitations, and the flexibility in designing both scope

and scale of the exercises. The re-playability of the

exercise actions by visual means increases peer-

evaluation and analytical discussions during the

debriefing sessions. Exercise debriefings supported by

the simulator software reports and the live-recordings

of the actions also allow the evaluation of the exercise

outcome to be based on tangible factors. This helps to

overcome the challenges of the exercise artificiality

and the unmeasurable results often associated with

the traditional exercise methods. Thus, simulations

can be said to complement traditional exercise

formats in oil spill response training. This conclusion

is also supported by the results of the qualitative

evaluation. According to the course participants, the

main benefit of the simulator training was the

feedback the simulation provides on the oil spill

behaviour as a reaction to the selected response

measures. The level of realism of the simulation

model was assessed to contribute to the true

identification of areas of improvement and possible

response gaps. The simulators offered added value in

training of both technical and non-technical skills, and

to concretizing the response related phenomena. It

was also proved that simulator training provides a

reliable and safe environment for assessing various oil

containment and recovery tactics. As field exercises

may be affected by environmental limitations, such as

ice-coverage, high sea-state, poor visibility or other

adverse weather conditions, simulator training is

constantly available. With target-oriented simulator

training, many of the benefits of field exercises are

gained, while the safety of the responders and the

time and costs-efficiency are improved.

The ease and flexibility of the simulator training is

likely to increase the popularity of the method. It

should be noted, however, that this type of training

requires the instructor(s) to have adequate spill

response expertise – otherwise there is a risk to train

participants only to be excellent users of simulators.

Setting the objectives and scenarios in a manner that

enables the gaining of transferrable skills requires

relevancy in the context of actual emergencies and

response operations. Close collaboration with the

target groups is also recommended as it enables

increased efficiency in achieving specific learning

results and supports customization of the training.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The simulator pilot courses were conducted under

SCAROIL project (Simulator Training for Cargo Handling

and Oil Recovery, S20604) funded by the European Social

Fund, South-Eastern University of Applied Sciences

(Xamk), the Finnish Maritime Foundation, Palosuojelun

Edistämissäätiö and William & Ester Otsakorpi Foundation.

The software updates and development of new oil recovery

simulator were funded by the European Regional

Development Fund and Xamk in an investment project

SCAROIL Simulators (A71714).

The project advisory committee comprised of the

designated oil spill response specialists representing the

Rescue Services of City of Helsinki, Eastern-Uusimaa,

Kymenlaakso, Lapland, North Karelia, Northern Savonia,

Oulu-Koillismaa, South Karelia, Southern Savonia,

Southwest Finland and Western-Uusimaa, the Emergency

Service College and the Centres for Economic Development,

Transport and the Environment of Uusimaa and Southeast

Finland. Special acknowledgment is made to the

contribution of the participants from above mentioned

response authorities and the Emergency Service College,

and to our co-workers at Xamk attending the development

of simulator courses: Mrs. Emmi Rantavuo and Mr. Perttu

Juvonen.

REFERENCES

Cross, S. & Werner, P. 2015. Oil spill response simulator

revisited. In Interspill Conference Proceedings 2015.

Amsterdam. p. 4.

Gleason, J. 2014. Getting Big Results by Going Small - The

Importance of Tabletop Exercises. Article in International

Oil Spill Conference Proceedings 2014. p. 120.

Halonen, J. 2018. Osaamiskartoituksesta tavoitteet

öljyntorjuntakoulutukselle. Article in Öljyntorjunnan

simulaatiokoulutus, SCAROIL-hankkeen osaprojektin

loppuraportti. Halonen J. (Ed.), Xamk Kehittää 58. Kotka:

Kaakkois-Suomen ammattikorkeakoulu. ISBN 978-952-

344-121-7. p. 19.

Halonen, J. 2018. Öljyntorjuntaa simulaatioympäristössä. In

Liikkeellä: Toimintaa ja tuloksia Logistiikan ja merenkulun

tutkimus- ja kehitystoiminnasta. Halonen J., Potinkara P.

(Eds.), Xamk kehittää 60. Kotka: Kaakkois-Suomen

ammattikorkeakoulu. ISBN 978-952-344-126-2. p. 101,

103–105.

Halonen, J.; Lanki, A. & Punnonen, J. 2018. Ensimmäisen

SCAROIL-pilottikoulutuksen palaute. Article in

Öljyntorjunnan simulaatiokoulutus, SCAROIL-hankkeen

osaprojektin loppuraportti. Halonen J. (Ed)., Xamk

Kehittää 58. Kotka: Kaakkois-Suomen

ammattikorkeakoulu. ISBN 978-952-344-121-7. p. 61.

Halonen, J.; Lanki, A. & Rantavuo, E. 2017. New Learning

Methods for Marine Oil Spill Response Training. In

TransNav, the International Journal on Marine Navigation

and Safety of Sea Transportation, Vol. 11, No. 2, p. 341, 342.

Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.12716/1001.11.02.18

Halonen J.; Rantavuo E. & Altarriba E. 2017.

Öljyntorjuntakoulutuksen ja -osaamisen nykytila.

SCAROIL-hankkeen selvitys öljyntorjunnan

koulutustarpeista. Xamk Tutkii 4. Kotka: Kaakkois-

Suomen ammattikorkeakoulu. ISBN 978-952-344-066-1.

Available at: http://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-952-344-066-1.

p. 15–17.

IPIECA & IOGP 2014. Oil spill exercises. Good practice

guidelines for the development of an effective exercise

programme. IOGP Report 515. p. 6, 19.

Leonard, J. J. & Roberson, M. 1999. Adding realism to

tabletop exercises. Article in International Oil Spill

Conference Proceedings 1999, p. 555, 556.

Lonka, H. 1998. Öljy- ja kemikaalivahinkojen

torjuntavalmius Suomessa – ympäristövahinkojen

torjunnan näkökulma. Suomen ympäristö 193. Suomen

ympäristökeskus. Helsinki: Edita Prima Oy. p. 104–105.

Patrick, L. & Barber, C. 2001. Tabletop exercises - preparing

through play. Article in International Oil Spill Conference

Proceedings. p. 365.

Rantavuo, E.; Halonen, J.; Lanki, A. & Tuomainen, T. 2018a,

Toisen SCAROIL-pilottikoulutuksen palaute. Article in

Öljyntorjunnan simulaatiokoulutus, SCAROIL-hankkeen

osaprojektin loppuraportti. Halonen J. (Ed)., Xamk

Kehittää 58. Kotka: Kaakkois-Suomen

ammattikorkeakoulu. ISBN 978-952-344-121-7. p. 74.

Rantavuo, E.; Malinen, H.; Halonen, J.; Lanki, A. &

Punnonen, J. 2018b. Oil Spill Response Simulator

Training – Realistic Enough To Improve Response

Capability? Lessons Learnt From Pilot Courses. Short

paper in Interspill 2018 Conference Proceedings.