11
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background and Rationale for Maritime Education
and Training (MET)
The increasing automation and complexity of
shipboard electrical systems demand a shift in
Maritime Education and Training (MET) toward
structured, competency-based approaches. Traditional
MET methods, reliant on classroom instruction and
limited onboard exposure, often can not provide high-
risk scenario training, particularly for critical
operations like manual generator synchronization and
emergency power management. Onboard training is
further constrained by operational priorities, safety
concerns, and the likelihood of real-life fault scenarios,
limiting trainees' ability to develop manual skills and
quick decision-making under pressure [1], [2].
In a study on e-learning, Chen, Bai, and Xiao
proposed in 2017, the use of e-learning to advance the
traditional maritime education. Similarly, Goerlandt in
2020 highlighted the role of maritime simulators in
providing controlled environments for familiarization
with safety-critical operations [3], [4]. These simulators
allow for the breakdown of complex scenarios to focus
on specific skills, including leadership, teamwork,
software proficiency, and hardware operation. As a
complementary solution to traditional onboard
training, high-fidelity Simulation-Based Training (SBT)
Maritime Education and Training: A Simulation-Based
Approach for Enhancing Ship Electric Load
Management Competency Through Emergency Scenario
Familiarization
R. Karimpour & M. Figari
University of Genova, Genova, Italy
ABSTRACT: As ship automation advances, maritime training must adapt to ensure proficiency in manual
operations during automation failures. Traditional Maritime Education and Training (MET) lacks standardized,
simulator-based assessments for critical tasks such as manual generator synchronization, leading to skill gaps in
high-risk scenarios.
This study evaluates the effectiveness of high-fidelity engine room simulators in improving situational awareness,
cognitive load management, and decision-making under stress. A Simulation-Based Training (SBT) framework
using the Wärtsilä TechSim engine room simulator was implemented at the University of Genoa (UNIGE),
aligning with the International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification, and Watchkeeping for
Seafarers (STCW) (Reg. III/1, Section A-III/1; Reg. I/14). Pre- and post-training assessments, simulator logs, and
instructor observations demonstrated significant improvements in synchronization execution time, fault
diagnosis, and emergency response efficiency.
However, the absence of structured, simulator-driven competency assessments in MET limits objective skill
measurement and training effectiveness. Drawing insights from aviation competency models, this study proposes
a structured assessment framework to standardize competency verification, enhance training methodologies, and
better equip seafarers for automation-driven ship operations.
http://www.transnav.eu
the International Journal
on Marine Navigation
and Safety of Sea Transportation
Volume 19
Number 1
March 2025
DOI: 10.12716/1001.19.01.02
12
offers a scalable and cost-effective alternative, with the
potential to significantly reduce operational costs.
Simulation-based training has emerged as a
transformative approach, offering a controlled,
immersive environment for developing proficiency in
fault diagnosis, synchronization execution, and
emergency response efficiency [5], [6]. High-fidelity
engine room simulators replicating complex shipboard
systems enable structured, repeatable simulations that
enhance situational awareness, decision-making, and
crisis management [7], [8].
While the 2010 Manila Amendments to the
International Convention on Standards of Training,
Certification, and Watchkeeping for Seafarers (STCW)
mandated the use of simulators for specific training
areas, including navigation, engine operations, and
resource management, however, the absence of fully
standardized evaluation protocols has hindered
consistent and systematic adoption of simulator-based
assessments across Maritime Education and Training
(MET) institutions. This inconsistency affects training
quality, competency verification, and regulatory
alignment. Recognizing these challenges, the
International Maritime Organization (IMO) initiated a
comprehensive review of the STCW Convention and
Code [6].
1.1.1 Regulatory alignment and the need for standardized
assessments
The IMO stipulates that officers must demonstrate
proficiency in electrical systems, including generator
synchronization and load management. The STCW
Convention (Reg. III/1, Section A-III/1) mandates
competence in electrical load management and
generator synchronization for electro-technical and
engineer engineer officers, ensuring safe power system
operation. Additionally, STCW Reg. I/14 emphasizes
training for operational safety and efficiency, including
synchronization during onshore power supply (OPS)
connections [9]. However, without standardized
simulator-based competency assessments, the full
potential of SBT remains underutilized. This study
evaluates the effectiveness of structured SBT in:
− Enhancing electrical load management and
generator synchronization skills using high-fidelity
simulators, and
− Developing situational awareness and decision-
making capabilities, aligning with STCW
Regulation I/14 and emphasizing safety-focused
training methodologies.
1.1.2 Bridging MET gaps through structured SBT
SBT enhances technical proficiency and emergency
preparedness, yet maritime education (MET) lacks
structured competency evaluations, unlike aviation,
which mandates recurrent simulator assessments
every 6–12 months A structured SBT framework in
MET can address gaps in ship electric load
management and manual generator synchronization,
critical tasks requiring precision and rapid decision-
making [10], [11].
1
While a wide range of standardized simulators exists for deck and
communication training (e.g., ARPA, GMDSS, ECDIS, high-voltage),
Table 1 highlights aviation’s competency-based
framework, which enhances safety and operational
readiness through standardized SBT. Unlike aviation's
ICAO-mandated simulator assessments, STCW lacks
recurrent training requirements. Adopting a structured
SBT model in MET could improve emergency
preparedness and decision-making, aligning maritime
training with STCW standards [12], [13].
Table 1. Comparison of Aviation vs. Maritime Simulator
Training Frameworks [12] , [13], [10].
Aviation Training
Maritime Training
International Civil
Aviation Organization
Competency-Based
Training & Assessment
STCW Competency-
Based Training
Mandatory recurrent
simulator assessments
Limited simulator
assessments in MET
Pilots must complete
simulator assessments
every 6-12 months
Seafarers are not
regularly assessed in
simulator environments
Highly structured
evaluation protocols
Lacks globally
standardized simulator
assessments
Requires recurrent
simulator-based
instructor training
Varies widely between
MET institutions
Addressing competency assessment gaps,
particularly in ship electric load management and
emergency power coordination, remains crucial for
modern maritime education and training. By
standardizing simulator-based evaluations within
STCW frameworks, maritime institutions can ensure
effective skill transferability, enhanced decision-
making, and improved safety outcomes in automation-
driven ship operations.
1
The following section defines the research
objectives and outlines how the study builds upon
existing simulation-based training models for MET
practices.
1.2 Research Objectives and Contributions
This study examines the pedagogical value of
simulation-based training (SBT) in shipboard electrical
systems, focusing on enhancing crisis response,
technical accuracy, and adaptability in a risk-free
atmosphere. By addressing real-world challenges such
as generator synchronization and fault diagnosis, SBT
provides a structured framework for developing
essential competencies. In particular, the study
explores how manual synchronization of a diesel
generator to the ship's electrical switchboard can
improve seafarers' ability to manage automation
failures effectively.
1.2.1 Research question
How effective are high-fidelity engine room simulators
in enhancing MET, particularly in developing technical
proficiency, decision-making skills, and emergency
response capabilities?
this study focuses specifically on engine room simulators and does
not attempt to evaluate simulator use in all maritime domains.
13
1.2.2 Key research objectives
To comprehensively investigate this question, the
study explores the following key research objectives:
1. Assess the impact of structured engine room
simulation training on task execution efficiency.
2. Measure competency development through
performance metrics and participant feedback.
3. Evaluate decision-making improvements in ship
manual power management(generator
synchronization) scenarios.
This study advances simulation-based training
(SBT) research by providing empirical validation of its
effectiveness in ship electric load management and
manual generator synchronization—a critical yet
underexplored competency. Unlike prior studies
relying on self-reported outcomes, this research
integrates quantitative performance metrics (pre/post-
test analysis) with qualitative evaluations (instructor
assessments, trainee feedback) to measure decision-
making, fault diagnosis, and execution accuracy.
Aligning SBT with STCW-mandated competencies
(Reg. III/1, I/14), this study benchmarks structured
simulator debriefing against aviation competency
models, addressing a gap in maritime training. By
identifying fidelity limitations in ship engine room
simulators, it underscores the need for standardized,
recurrent training to enhance skill transferability,
operational readiness, and safety in automation-driven
ship systems.
1.3 Methodology
After Chapter 1, which highlighted the need for
simulation-based training (SBT) in maritime education
(MET) due to the limitations of traditional methods
and emphasized structured competency training for
shipboard electrical systems, Chapter 2, this study
employs a Systematic Scoping Literature Review
(SSLR) methodology to examine relevant research on
simulation-based training in MET [10].
1. The initial stage of the literature review involved
compiling a research pool through Google Scholar
searches using targeted keywords, including
"familiarization with ship machinery via
simulators," "added value of ship simulators in
maritime education," "performance metrics in ship
simulator training," "pedagogical approaches to
cadet training with simulators," "advantages and
limitations of ship simulator-based education,"
"simulating engine room emergency scenarios," and
"measuring the effectiveness of simulator-based
training.". In the second step, the review process
continued with an initial pool of forty selected
studies, which were filtered through three stages:
2. Title Screening: Exclusion of seven studies due to
duplication or irrelevance.
3. Abstract and Conclusion Scan: Removal of five
studies based on predefined Inclusion and
Exclusion Criteria (Studies were selected based on
inclusion criteria: publications since 2010 (aligning
with the Manila amendments to STCW 2010),
research on simulation-based training for ship
electrical systems, manual generator
synchronization, electrical load management, and
empirical studies on situational awareness in
maritime emergencies. Studies without empirical
data or validation methodologies and non-English
papers without translations were excluded. This
ensured the inclusion of relevant, high-quality
sources.
4. Full-Text Review: A further two studies were
excluded after a detailed methodological and
thematic evaluation.
Finally, after applying these filtering stages, twenty
six references were reviewed and used for this study.
As illustrated in Figure 1, this research follows a
Systematic Scoping Literature Review (SSLR)
approach, which outlines the inclusion and exclusion
process used for selecting studies. These references are
listed at the reference list at the end of this article.
Figure 1. Systematic Scoping Literature Review (SSLR).
Chapter 3 evaluates simulation-based training
(SBT) for manual generator synchronization using the
Wärtsilä TechSim simulator. Fourteen students from
the University of Genoa(UNIGE) participated in
theoretical instruction, simulator exercises, and
structured debriefing. Performance was assessed
through pre/post-tests, simulator logs, and instructor
observations, measuring accuracy, decision-making,
and fault diagnosis. A mixed-methods approach
integrated quantitative metrics with qualitative
feedback.
Chapter 4 examines the impact of SBT under a
specific condition, confirming significant competency
gains in technical proficiency, situational awareness,
and decision-making. Chapter 5 with discussion and
comparison with existing literature critically analyzes
these findings against prior research. Finally, the
conclusion chapter highlights SBT's effectiveness in
ship electrical load management, advocating for
structured simulator training. See Figure 2.
Figure 2. Research Structure and Framework.
14
2 LITERATURE REVIEW: THEORETICAL
FOUNDATIONS OF SIMULATOR-BASED
TRAINING IN MET
Building on the Chapter 1, this chapter presents a
structured literature review of selected references to
establish the theoretical foundations of Simulation-
Based Training (SBT) in MET. The review
systematically identifies key aspects of SBT relevant to
maritime competency development, focusing on three
core areas: task execution efficiency (Section 2.1),
competency assessment through performance metrics
and feedback (Section 2.2), and decision-making
improvements in engine room emergencies (Section
2.3). By analyzing empirical studies on simulator
fidelity, structured assessments, and cognitive
adaptability, this chapter explores SBT within STCW
competency frameworks, emphasizing its role in
enhancing maritime training outcomes.
2.1 Impact of Structured Engine Room Simulation
Training on Task Execution Efficiency
Simulator-based training (SBT) in Maritime Education
and Training (MET) has gained prominence as an
effective method for skill acquisition, addressing the
limitations of traditional classroom instruction and
onboard training [14]. Previous studies have
demonstrated the effectiveness of ship navigation
simulators in replicating high-pressure
communication scenarios and distress protocols,
enhancing practical communication skills in maritime
operations [7]. High-fidelity engine room simulators to
a high-respect replicate real-world operational
challenges, allowing trainees to develop proficiency in
executing complex technical procedures with
improved efficiency. Some research indicates that
structured simulator scenarios enhance competency
outcomes, skill retention, and task execution accuracy,
with simulator-trained participants exhibiting an
increase in technical precision and a reduction in
response time during emergency operations [5], [15].
The effectiveness of structured simulator training
hinges on realism, or fidelity, which ensures the
simulation environment aligns with operational and
educational objectives [2]. Advanced immersive
simulators, such as full-mission maritime systems,
integrate high-fidelity simulations with digital
learning tools, fostering technical proficiency in
manual generator synchronization, electrical load
management, and emergency fault diagnosis [12].
Furthermore, the integration of augmented reality
(AR) and virtual reality (VR) enhances engagement
and learning outcomes, reducing dropout rates and
promoting skill development [16]. Despite these
advancements, standardization in MET competency
assessments remains insufficient, highlighting the
need for structured evaluation protocols [13].
2.2 Competency Development Through Performance
Metrics and Participant Feedback
Competency acquisition in MET is traditionally
assessed through theoretical exams and limited
onboard evaluations, which fail to measure real-world
proficiency [13]. As illustrated in Figure 3, engine room
simulators—which replicate power distribution
networks, electrical system failures, and generator
synchronization procedures—offer a controlled
environment for maritime students to develop and
demonstrate their technical competencies [17].
Studies indicate that simulator-trained participants
achieve significantly higher success rates in executing
generator synchronization procedures compared to
their initial attempts, underscoring the efficacy of
structured competency development [5]. However,
existing STCW-aligned MET training frameworks lack
structured simulator-based assessment protocols,
limiting the ability to measure practical competency
effectively. Unlike aviation, where recurrent simulator
assessments are mandatory, maritime competency
evaluations rely heavily on theoretical testing, failing
to account for emergency scenario performance.
Furthermore, while structured emergency drills exist,
particularly in safety management systems, the
assessment of individual performance during such
scenarios remains inconsistent across MET institutions
[18].
Figure 3. Generator Panels of a Dual-Fuel Tanker Ship on
Wärtsilä Engine Room Simulator at UNIGE
To address this gap, structured competency
evaluations integrating performance metrics,
standardized assessment criteria, and instructor-led
debriefing are essential. Research supports that post-
training evaluations incorporating real-time feedback
mechanisms enhance competency retention and
practical skill development [19]. Moreover, eye-
tracking and verbal response analysis methods utilized
in offshore well control training demonstrate
measurable improvements in system failure
mitigation, further validating the need for
performance-based competency assessments in
maritime training [20].
2.3 Decision-Making Improvements in Ship Engine Room
Emergency Scenarios
Effective decision-making under pressure is critical for
maritime safety, particularly in emergency engine
room scenarios. Situational awareness (SA) is essential
for diagnosing and mitigating electrical system failures
and generator malfunctions. Research highlights the
role of structured Simulation-Based Training (SBT) in
enhancing SA and improving fault diagnosis,
contributing to more efficient decision-making in
emergency situations [21]. Blended learning models
15
integrating simulator training with digital case studies
enhance cognitive adaptability and problem-solving
efficiency [12].
Structured Simulation-Based Training (SBT)
enhances diagnostic accuracy and supports adaptive
decision-making in maritime training [2]. Research
highlights its role in improving performance and
cognitive adaptability under complex operational
conditions. However, standardized metrics
quantifying decision-making error reduction in
emergency drills require further empirical validation
[11], [22]. Moreover, maritime training lacks adaptive
crisis components found in aviation. Over-reliance on
automated decision-support systems necessitates
structured situational awareness training to enhance
critical thinking [8], [10].
Given that SA-related errors account for 71% of
maritime incidents [21], instructor-led training,
including scenario execution and debriefing, which is
aligned with the requirements of the STCW education,
is essential for improving emergency preparedness
[23]. Standardized simulator-based assessments in
MET would enhance decision-making, safety, and
operational efficiency in engine room management.
The following chapter details the research
methodology used to assess simulator-based
competency acquisition in shipboard electrical
systems.
3 RESEARCH DESIGN AND EXPERIMENTAL
APPROACH TO SIMULATOR-BASED
TRAINING
Based on the valuable insights gained from the
systematic scoping literature review in previous
chapter, an experimental approach designed in this
research to simulator-based training is presented in
Figure 4.
Figure 4. Research Design and Experimental Approach to
Simulator-Based Training Evaluation
3.1 Scenario Selection
Title of Scenario: " Manual Generator Synchronization
in Emergency Conditions (Triggered by Failure or
Non-Operational Status of Automatic
Synchronization)".
Manual synchronization is a fundamental skill for
ship engineers and officers, ensuring the stability and
safety of the ship's electrical system. Although
synchronization is typically handled automatically by
PLC-based systems, understanding and executing
manual synchronization remains critical for engineers
during automation failure or emergency scenarios. By
focusing on this scenario, the study aligns with real-
world demands, where improper synchronization can
lead to system instability, electrical faults, or even fires.
This scenario enhances technical proficiency and
prepares trainees for both routine and emergency
operations in high-pressure situations. This approach
directly supports competency-based training
frameworks in Maritime Education and Training
(MET), as outlined in STCW guidelines, by bridging
the gap between theoretical knowledge and practical,
real-life application.
Objective: Train participants to manually
synchronize two generators to obtain safe and stable
operational conditions.
Simulator: This study was conducted at the the
Department of Electrical, Electronic,
Telecommunications Engineering, and Naval
Architecture (DITEN) of the University of Genoa, using
the Wärtsilä TechSim engine room simulator that is
considered a full-mission engine room simulator. It is
designed to replicate the complex systems and
operations of a real ship's engine room, providing a
highly realistic training environment for maritime
professionals. The simulator covers a wide range of
scenarios, including power management, machinery
operations, failure handling, and emergency
procedures, making it a comprehensive tool for
developing technical and operational competencies.
The Wärtsilä TechSim simulator used in this study
replicates a modern tanker's electrical switchboard
with a high level of realism, providing user interfaces
and synchro panels nearly identical to those on real
vessels. This fidelity enhances skill transfer and
situational familiarity. Wärtsilä TechSim is widely
used in maritime training institutions and by shipping
companies to ensure that trainees and crew members
are well-prepared for real-world challenges in engine
room operations [24]. Within the scope of this exercise,
the simulator accurately modeled a modern tanker
ship's electrical system. This training platform enables
participants to practice manual generator
synchronization, power distribution, and response
procedures in a controlled environment. See Figure 5.
Figure 5. The trainee station of the engine room simulator at
UNIGE
Instructors: The primary instructor holds a Chief
Engineer Certificate of Competency and has over 10
years of seagoing experience on cargo ships. He also
holds postgraduate degrees, with research focused on
Shoreside Electricity (SSE) and ship-generator
synchronization. Certified in Training for Trainers and
Assessors through the Use of Simulators by Wärtsilä,
he ensures high-quality simulator-based training. The
exercise was supervised by the Head of Maritime
Science and Technology, a full professor at the
University of Genoa (UNIGE), who is also certified in
16
Training for Trainers and Assessors through the Use of
Simulators.
Participant selection: This study involved fourteen
participants from the University of Genoa, comprising
two, third-year Maritime Science and Technology
students, and twelve master's-level Naval Architecture
students. While all participants had a foundational
understanding of ship electrical systems, none had
prior hands-on experience with generator
synchronization using simulators, making them an
ideal test group for assessing the effectiveness of
structured simulation-based training (SBT). The
gender distribution was balanced, ensuring diverse
perspectives in training effectiveness.
However, it should be noted that this study is
limited by the relatively small sample size (n=14),
drawn from a single institution, which may constrain
the generalizability of the findings. Additionally, the
study does not include long-term retention analysis or
performance tracking in real-world onboard scenarios.
Future studies involving larger, more diverse
participant groups and longitudinal data collection are
recommended to validate and extend these results.
3.2 Training Process
Experimental setup and training process: The training
methodology was designed to follow a structured and
progressive approach, ensuring optimal competency
development through a combination of theoretical
familiarization, hands-on simulator exercises,
instructor-led demonstrations, and debriefing sessions.
Due to the availability of a single trainee simulator
station for students and an instructor station for
monitoring, participants were organized into small
groups of 2–3 individuals. Prior to the practical
sessions, participants were provided with a
comprehensive training manual. This manual covered
essential theoretical concepts related to ship electrical
systems and generator synchronization. It included
detailed technical specifications of a tanker ship, step-
by-step synchronization procedures tailored for the
Wärtsilä TechSim simulator, and operational protocols
for both standard and emergency scenarios.
The training process was divided into distinct
phases, each with specific activities, durations, and key
learning outcomes, as summarized in the following
table:
Table 2. Experimental Setup and Training Process
Phase
Activity
Time
Learning
Outcome
1-Theoretical
Familiarization
Self-study on simulator
concepts
1 hour
Understanding
fundamentals
2-Simulator
Introduction
Instructor
synchronization
demonstration
30 mins
System
familiarization
3-Initial
Simulation
Exercise
First synchronization
test
15 mins
Baseline
performance
assessment
4-Demonstration
Phase
Instructor-guided
demonstration
30 mins
Correct
synchronization
procedures
5-Second
Simulation
Exercise
Second synchronization
test with feedback
15 mins
Performance
improvement
6-Debriefing &
Analysis
Reviewing results and
feedback
15 mins
Reinforcing
learning
Generator synchronization procedure: Generator
synchronization on ships involves matching the
electrical parameters of multiple generators before
connecting them to a common bus bar, enabling load
sharing and ensuring the proper operation of the ship's
electrical system.
As illustrated in Figure 6, key parameters for
synchronization include voltage, frequency, phase
angle, and phase sequence. Proper synchronization is
crucial for load sharing, system stability, and safety, as
it prevents overloading, electrical faults, and potential
fires. The synchronization process involves adjusting
the generator speed to match frequency, using voltage
regulators to match voltage, and employing tools like
synchroscopes or synchronization lamps to align phase
angles [25]. Generator Synchronization Process:
[Adjust Generator Speed] → [Match
Voltage&Frequency] → [Check Phase Sequence] →
[Align Phase Angle] → [Close Circuit Breaker]
Figure 6. Synchro Panel of a Tanker Ship Simulator used for
generator synchronization, highlighting the synchroscope.
Figure 6 illustrates the setup where trainees
perform manual generator synchronization exercises
using the Wärtsilä TechSim engine room simulator.
The simulation displays key electrical parameters—
voltage, frequency, and phase—of both the running
and incoming generators, guiding trainees through the
synchronization process before closing the circuit
breaker. As shown in Figure 7, the black knob on the
generator governor control is used for fine-tuning the
incoming generator's parameters to match those of the
running generator. Once synchronization is achieved,
the red circuit breaker knob is engaged, allowing the
synchronized generators to share the kilowatt (kW)
load efficiently [25].
17
Figure 7. a) Adjusting Parameters (voltage, frequency, phase)
of the Incoming Generator; b) Closing the generator's circuit
breaker for load sharing.
This training scenario familiarizes participants with
essential shipboard electrical load management
procedures, emphasizing manual generator
synchronization. Trainees must precisely align the
electrical voltage, frequency, and phase angle to ensure
stable load distribution and system reliability. By
completing this exercise, they develop a foundational
understanding of synchronization principles, gaining
the technical competence and confidence necessary for
more complex emergency operations. The controlled
simulator environment reinforces skill acquisition
before progressing to fault diagnosis and
troubleshooting scenarios.
3.3 Data Collection
Data Collection, performance metrics, and post-
simulation assessment: A comprehensive mixed-
methods approach was employed to evaluate the
effectiveness of simulator-based training (SBT) in
decision-making efficiency and crisis management
skills. The assessment framework integrated
quantitative and qualitative measures, ensuring a
holistic analysis of participants' performance before,
during, and after training. Below Table 3 provides a
clear distinction between quantitative and qualitative
measures, helping quickly to grasp the approach for
data collection, performance metrics, and post-
simulation assessment.
Table 3. Data collection, performance metrics, and post-
simulation assessment
Evaluation
Category
Specific
Measure
Purpose
Assessment
Approach
Quantitative
Measures:
Pre-/Post-
Training
Assessments
Evaluate
competency
improvements
Knowledge &
procedure
Performance
Metrics
Measure speed,
accuracy, and
fault resolution
Simulator logs &
recorded
execution data
Performance
Analysis
Review
response times,
teamwork, and
decision-making
Simulator task
observations
Simulator Log
Analysis
Identify
execution
strengths and
weaknesses
Analysis of
recorded system
responses
Qualitative
Measures:
Instructor
Observations
Assess decision-
making, stress
handling, and
teamwork
Structured
instructor
evaluations
Instructor
Feedback
Improve
procedural
accuracy and
adaptive
response
Expert
recommendations
post-simulation
Trainee
Feedback
Surveys
Assess realism,
engagement,
and applicability
Responses &
group interviews
Best Practices
Discussion
Reinforce
synchronization
& fault-handling
strategies
Post-simulation
trainee-instructor
reviews
By integrating real-time performance tracking with
structured debriefing, this method provided empirical
validation of SBT's effectiveness in maritime
competency development.
The evaluation of the findings of this experimental
approach is presented and explained in the next
section.
4 RESULTS AND PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS OF
SIMULATOR-BASED TRAINING
This section presents the study’s findings based on a
structured evaluation aligned with the research
objectives. The assessment process began with a pre-
test measuring execution time and fault diagnosis
accuracy to establish a performance baseline. During
the simulation phase, real-time data from the Wärtsilä
TechSim logs were analyzed to capture improvements
in synchronization accuracy, error rates, and response
times. Instructors then evaluated procedural
adherence and decision-making using a standardized
1–5 scale. Finally, post-test assessments and participant
feedback were used to validate gains in operational
accuracy, fault diagnosis efficiency, and situational
awareness. This approach discusses the effectiveness of
Simulation-Based Training (SBT) in enhancing both
technical proficiency and emergency response
capabilities in ship electrical load management.
4.1 Simulator Log Analysis for Assessing SBT Task
Execution Efficiency
To assess the impact of structured simulator-based
training (SBT) on task execution efficiency, key
18
performance indicators such as synchronization
execution accuracy, fault recognition response times,
and synchronization error rates were analyzed.
Simulator log data revealed significant improvements
post-training. Synchronization execution accuracy
increased from 0% to 95%, indicating enhanced
precision. Fault recognition response times improved
notably, reducing the average diagnostic response to
three to four minutes. Additionally, synchronization
error rates decreased substantially, reflecting greater
operational accuracy in manual generator
synchronization. Therefore, the findings confirm that
SBT effectively enhances technical proficiency and
decision-making efficiency, reinforcing its value in
ship power management training.
4.2 Measuring Competency Development Through
Performance Metrics and Participant Feedback
4.2.1 Pre-Test and Post-Test Evaluations of Competency
Acquisition
The pre-test and post-test assessments demonstrated
significant improvements in synchronization
execution time, decision-making accuracy, and fault
diagnosis efficiency following simulator-based
training. Before training, most participants struggled to
complete manual synchronization within the
designated fifteen-minute timeframe. After training,
execution time was reduced by nearly 50%, reflecting
greater proficiency and confidence.
Decision-making accuracy also improved notably.
Initially, only one-quarter of the trainee groups
successfully completed synchronization tasks without
errors. Post-training results showed 100% completion,
indicating enhanced procedural adherence and
situational awareness. Similarly, fault diagnosis
efficiency increased, with all trainees successfully
identifying and resolving system faults after training,
compared to only half before.
As shown in Figure 8, these findings confirm the
effectiveness of simulator-based training in maritime
education, demonstrating its role in enhancing
technical precision, decision-making, and problem-
solving skills in ship electrical load management.
Figure 8. Performance metrics: Pre-test and post-test
evaluations of competency acquisition
These results confirm that structured training
significantly enhances competency development by
improving procedural accuracy and operational
efficiency.
4.2.2 Performance Metrics for Competency Evaluation
To further quantify competency development,
performance metrics captured by the simulator logs
were analyzed. These metrics provide an objective
measure of skill acquisition, including:
− Execution accuracy and task completion: Significant
improvements in task completion rates, reflecting
enhanced procedural adherence.
− Problem-solving and fault recognition: Reduction
in fault recognition response time, showcasing
improved situational awareness and competency in
identifying electrical system malfunctions.
− Error reduction in synchronization procedures:
Post-training results demonstrate increased
technical proficiency, with near-total elimination of
synchronization errors.
These performance indicators support the point
that simulator-based training leads to measurable
improvements in technical competency.
4.2.3 Trainee Feedback on Simulator-Based Training
Effectiveness
Trainees highlighted the realistic replication of
maritime operations as a key advantage of simulator-
based training, allowing them to bridge theoretical
knowledge with practical application. Many reported
increased confidence in performing critical tasks such
as manual generator synchronization and fault
management, attributing this to the structured learning
environment that enabled risk-free experimentation
and problem-solving. Participants suggested
enhancements, including more complex scenarios to
refine skills in diverse conditions, enhanced real-time
feedback mechanisms for better learning
reinforcement, and structured debriefing sessions to
strengthen the integration of theory with practice.
These insights underscore the pedagogical value of
simulator-based training, reinforcing its role in
competency development and decision-making
proficiency in maritime education.
4.3 Evaluating Decision-Making Improvements in Ship
Engine Room Emergency Scenarios
Instructor-led evaluations assessed situational
awareness, cognitive load management, and real-time
decision-making efficiency in high-pressure maritime
scenarios. Initial assessments revealed gaps in trainees'
ability to anticipate and recognize critical faults, but
post-training evaluations demonstrated marked
improvements in fault identification and resolution.
Participants also showed enhanced cognitive load
management, effectively processing multiple
information sources while reducing response time to
system failures. Before training, many relied on trial-
and-error decision-making, whereas post-training
assessments indicated that 100% of participants
followed structured decision-making processes,
adhering to standard operational procedures. Key
findings highlight significant improvements in crisis
management skills, knowledge application, and
adaptability. Trainees exhibited better task
prioritization under stress, improved teamwork and
communication in electrical load management
scenarios, and a notable reduction in decision-making
errors. These results reinforce the effectiveness of
19
simulator-based training in strengthening operational
resilience and informed decision-making in high-risk
maritime environments.
5 DISCUSSION AND COMPARISON WITH
EXISTING LITERATURE
High-fidelity simulators are recognized for improving
seafarer competency, situational awareness, and
emergency decision-making [7] [5]. Prior studies
indicate that structured simulator-based training
enhances fault diagnosis accuracy and reduces
decision-making errors in maritime operations [2] [15].
Our study extends this by integrating quantitative
performance metrics with qualitative instructor
insights, offering a more comprehensive evaluation
than studies relying solely on self-reported outcomes.
Previous research has primarily emphasized
technical proficiency in simulator-based training [8],
while this study highlights the role of structured
scenario-based debriefing in enhancing cognitive
adaptability and skill retention. This approach is well
established in aviation and has been applied in
maritime simulation training, as discussed in
structured simulator debriefings (Chapter 4.3). Our
findings align with Bogusławski et al., who emphasize
post-scenario reflections as key to optimizing
procedural execution and long-term learning [18].
As also summarized in Figure 9, structured
simulator-based training, when combined with
targeted debriefing, significantly enhances:
− Crisis management and decision-making –
Improved situational awareness and team
coordination, aligning with STCW requirements
[23] [6], with measurable performance gains in
operational readiness.
− Skill transferability and learning retention –
Empirical evidence confirms improved post-
training task accuracy and faster execution times,
further supporting the role of structured debriefing
in adaptive learning, as demonstrated by
Hjelmervik et al. and Hontvedt [2] [26].
− Cognitive workload optimization – High cognitive
load initially led to errors in high-stress scenarios
like manual generator synchronization, but
structured training improved adaptability and
reduced mistakes, as highlighted in the research of
Hjelmervik et al. [2].
Figure 9. Key findings of this research aligned with the
existing discussed literature
Our findings reinforce structured simulator
training and debriefing as essential in maritime
education, providing empirical evidence for its impact
on competency development, knowledge retention,
and decision-making efficiency.
While the simulator-based environment provided
significant training value, it should be noted that it
does not necessarily capture all real-world
complexities, including rare but high-impact issues
such as excitation problems and reactive power
disparities. Furthermore, future simulator-based
scenarios may incorporate more frequently
encountered electrical issues such as excitation
anomalies and load imbalance.
6 CONCLUSION
This study provides empirical evidence that
Simulation-Based Training (SBT) significantly
improves technical proficiency, decision-making
accuracy, and situational awareness in ship electric
load management. This study combines performance
data with structured instructor feedback, offering a
holistic view of trainee competency—an approach not
thoroughly explored in existing literature.
The results reflect the study’s original objectives by
demonstrating clear improvements in task execution
efficiency, competency development, and decision-
making under emergency conditions. The ship engine
room simulator demonstrated measurable gains in
generators synchronization execution time, fault
diagnosis, and manual emergency response efficiency.
Evaluation criteria—such as execution accuracy, fault
diagnosis response time, and procedural adherence—
were consistently applied using simulator log data,
instructor assessments, and pre/post-test comparisons,
ensuring a structured and transparent performance
analysis. By integrating structured simulator-driven
training, participants developed adaptive cognitive
skills, enhancing their ability to handle manual
generator synchronization and emergency power
transitions—competencies underrepresented in
traditional MET.
Despite its advantages, integrating SBT into STCW-
mandated training faces challenges. The absence of
standardized simulator-based competency
assessments limits formal skill evaluation, unlike
aviation, where structured simulator assessments
occur at fixed intervals. Additionally, simulator fidelity
constraints restrict the full replication of real-world
operational variability and stressors, affecting skill
transferability.
Financial and infrastructural barriers further hinder
accessibility. High-end simulators offer immersive
learning but remain costly, limiting adoption in
resource-constrained institutions. A scalable approach,
including cloud-based platforms and modular training
models, could expand accessibility while ensuring
training quality. Cross-platform STCW-aligned
competency assessments would promote standardized
training outcomes.
Building on the current findings, future research
may aim to integrate AI-driven performance analytics
to further personalize simulation-based training (SBT)
feedback. Additionally, developing a standardized
rubric for simulator-based competency assessments
across institutions could ensure greater consistency
and comparability. Expanding this research to include
cross-institutional cohorts would help validate the
effectiveness of SBT on a larger scale.
20
REFERENCES
[1] S. C. Mallam, S. Nazir and S. K. Renganayagalu,
“Rethinking maritime education, training, and operations
in the digital era: Applications for emerging immersive
technologies.,” Journal of Marine Science and
Engineering, vol. volume 7, no. issue 12, p.
https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse7120428, 2019.
[2] K. Hjelmervik, S. Nazir and A. Myhrvold, “Simulator
training for maritime complex tasks: An experimental
study.,” WMU Journal of Maritime Affairs, vol. volume
17, no. issue 1, pp. pages 85-101.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s13437-017-0133-0, 2018.
[3] X. Chen, X. Bai and Y. Xiao, “The application of e-learning
in maritime education and training in China,” TransNav,
The International Journal on Marine Navigation and
Safety of Sea Transportation, vol. volume 11, no. issue 2,
p. pages 163–168. https://doi.org/10.12716/1001.11.02.19,
2107.
[4] F. Goerlandt, “Maritime Autonomous Surface Ships from
a risk governance perspective: Interpretation and
implications,” Safety Science, vol. 128, p.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2020.104758, 2020.
[5] E. Demirel and T. Albayrak, “Evaluation of Simulator Use
in Maritime Education and Training (MET) Institutes.,” in
In Proceedings of the International Scientific Conference
SEA-CONF 2022, 2022.
[6] IMO, “International Convention on Standards of
Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers
(STCW),” 2010. [Online]. Available:
https://www.imo.org/en/OurWork/HumanElement/Page
s/STCW-Convention.aspx. [Accessed 2025].
[7] S. Nazir and S. Jungefeldt, “Simulator-based training for
maritime operations: A comparative study,” . In 18th
Annual General Assembly of the International
Association of Maritime Universities: Global perspectives
in MET: Towards sustainable, green and integrated
maritime transport , vol. 1, 2019.
[8] M. Baldauf, J.-U. Schröder-Hinrichs, A. Kataria, K.
Benedict and G. Tuschling, “Multidimensional
simulation in team training for safety and security in
maritime transportation,” Journal of Transportation
Safety & Security, vol. volume 8, no. issue 3, pp. pages
197-213. https://doi.org/10.1080/19439962.2014.996932,
2016.
[9] IMO, “Interim guidelines on safe operation of onshore
power supply (OPS) service in port for ships engaged on
international voyages (MSC.1/Circ.1675),” 2023. [Online].
Available:
https://www.skanregistry.com/uploads/download-
directory/pdf/319/document.pdf.
[10] D. C. Pham, “1. Pham, D. C. (2019). Improving
simulation-based training to better serve the maritime
community. [Master's thesis, World Maritime
University],” 2019. [Online]. Available:
https://commons.wmu.se/all_dissertations/1182/.
[11] S. Dugan, R. Skjetne, K. Wróbel, J. Montewka, M. Gil and
I. Utne, “Integration Test Procedures for a Collision
Avoidance,” TransNav: The International Journal on
Marine Navigation and Safety of Sea Transportation, vol.
17, no. 2, p. http://dx.doi.org/10.12716/1001.17.02.14, 2023.
[12] S. Galić, Z. Lušić and T. Stanivuk, “E-learning in
maritime affairs,” Journal of Naval Architecture and
Marine Engineering, vol. 17(1), p. 38–50.
https://doi.org/10.3329/jname.v17i1.42203, 2020.
[13] C. T. MAUNG, “Simulation training and assessment in
maritime education and training [Master's dissertation,
World Maritime University].,” 2019. [Online]. Available:
https://commons.wmu.se/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=21
39&context=all_dissertations.
[14] H. O. Wai, “Examining the use of blended learning in
maritime education and training -MSc Thsis,” 2021.
[Online]. Available:
https://commons.wmu.se/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=26
99&context=all_dissertations. [Accessed 2025].
[15] C. Sellberg, “From briefing through scenario to
debriefing: The maritime instructor's work during
simulator-based training,” Cognition, Technology &
Work, vol. 20, pp. 49–62. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10111-
017-0446-y, 2017.
[16] M. H. Dewan, R. Godina, M. R. K. Chowdhury, C. W. M.
Noor, W. M. N. W. Nik and M. Man, “Immersive and
non-immersive simulators for education and training in
maritime domain—A review,” Journal of Marine Science
and Engineering, vol. 11, no. 1, p.
https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse11010147.
[17] M. Hontvedt and H. C. Arnseth, “On the bridge to learn:
Analyzing the social organization of nautical instruction
in a ship simulator,” Computer-Supported Collaborative
Learning, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 89–112.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-013-9166-3, 2013.
[18] K. Bogusławski, J. Nasur, J. Li, M. Gil, K. Wróbel and F.
Goerlandts, “A cross-domain scientometric analysis of
situational awareness of autonomous vehicles with focus
on the maritime domain,” IEEE Access, vol. 10, pp. 50047-
50068. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2022.3174097,
2022.
[19] G. Müller-Plath, J. Lehletner, J. Maier, J. Silva-Löbling, H.
Zhang, X. Zhang and S. Zhou, “How does maritime
situation awareness depend on navigation automation
and mental workload? A sea simulator experiment,”
TransNav: The International Journal on Marine
Navigation and Safety of Sea Transportation, vol. 17, no.
4, p. http://dx.doi.org/10.12716/1001.17.04.23, 2023.
[20] M. A. Raza, S. Salehi, S. Ghazal, V. T. Ybarra, S. A. M.
Naqvi, E. T. Cokely and C. Teodoriu, “Situational
awareness measurement in a simulation-based training
framework for offshore well control operations,” Journal
of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, vol. 62, p.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jlp.2019.103921, 2019.
[21] A. Nizar, T. Miwa and M. Uchida, “Simulator-based
human reliability analysis using Bayesian network: A
case study on situation awareness in engine resources
management.,” TransNav: The International Journal on
Marine Navigation and Safety of Sea Transportation, vol.
18, no. 3, p. http://dx.doi.org/10.12716/1001.18.03.13, 2024.
[22] T. Okazaki, C. Nishizaki and K. Murai, “Situation
awareness and mental workload of navigator in ship
maneuvering simulator,” IEEE, World Automation
Congress (WAC), p.
https://doi.org/10.1109/WAC.2016.7582956, 2016.
[23] ITF, “ STCW Guide for seafarers by International
Transport Workers Federation,” 2010. [Online].
Available: https://www.itfglobal.org/en/resources/stcw-
guide-guide-seafarers.
[24] Wärtsilä, “Wärtsilä Engine room simulator,” [Online].
Available:
https://www.wartsila.com/marine/products/simulation-
and-training/technological-simulators/engine-room-
simulator. [Accessed 14 03 2025].
[25] R. Karimpour, “Synchronizing Generators on Ships: A
Comprehensive Guide,” MaritimEducation, [Online].
Available: https://maritimeducation.com/synchronizing-
generators-on-ships-a-comprehensive-guide/. [Accessed
15 1 2025].
[26] M. Hontvedt, “Professional vision in simulated
environments — Examining professional maritime pilots'
performance of work tasks in a full-mission ship
simulator,” Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, vol.
7, pp. 71-84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lcsi.2015.07.003,
2015.