Shipping’s safety paradox is stark: vessel losses are at record lows, yet distress calls remain stubbornly high. Inmarsat’s latest report reveals that while the number of total losses has plummeted, incidents are evolving, not disappearing. Machinery breakdowns, collisions, fires, cyber threats, and geopolitical instability are reshaping risk profiles, demanding new safeguards and competencies. The message is clear: reducing losses is not the same as reducing risk. To protect crews and build resilient operations, the industry must prioritise clarity over complexity and integration over fragmentation.
Distress data is only part of the story. A 1.6% rise in distress calls last year underscores that crews are still facing critical situations. Behind the statistics are human stories—long hours, record crew abandonments, and limited preparation for new fuels. Add conflict zones, congested waters, and volatile weather, and it’s evident that shipping has become more demanding than ever. Legacy fragmentation and alarm fatigue further complicate the picture. Digital systems intended to relieve pressure often remain siloed, generating multiple dashboards and alarms that overwhelm officers. Instead of sharpening awareness, this patchwork adds stress, leaving crews juggling screens and dealing with alerts that may not even require action.
The Inmarsat report underscores the human element as central to safety. Fatigue, isolation, and inadequate training remain persistent challenges. Safety cannot be separated from welfare. Technology only helps if it reduces stress and supports better decisions. Systems must be designed to assist, not overwhelm, and act as trusted partners, not distractions.
Towards cognitive seaworthiness. For centuries, seaworthiness meant whether a vessel’s hull and machinery could withstand a voyage. Today, a ship may be technically sound yet cognitively unseaworthy if its crew is overwhelmed by alarms and poor visibility of risk. Cognitive seaworthiness means ensuring the bridge environment supports decision-making. Clear, consistent information is as vital as a sound engine room. AI-enabled platforms can deliver it by filtering noise, harmonising inputs, and giving officers a trusted view.
Inmarsat’s call for an anonymised, shared safety data ecosystem is timely. Pooling incident reports could help regulators, insurers, and owners anticipate risks. But aggregated reporting is only part of the answer. Real progress also depends on live operational data being fused into a coherent picture at sea—and that is where AI comes in.
At Orca AI, we’ve seen the impact when crews are given a simplified, integrated view. By fusing radar, AIS, and optical sensors into one platform, supported by machine learning, we provide more accurate target detection than the human eye. Risk notifications are projected clearly, helping officers decide when to act. This clarity matters most in congested waters and low visibility, where many distress calls originate. By reducing ambiguity, AI decision support lightens workload, lowers stress, and enables crews to focus on safe navigation. The benefits extend beyond the bridge: regulators and insurers gain an auditable trail, while operators see measurable performance gains.
How should the industry respond to the Inmarsat findings? First, by recognising that persistent distress calls signal a need for systemic change. Safety cannot be measured solely by vessel losses; it must reflect everyday risks. Second, by shifting the digitalisation agenda from “more data” to “better data”. Third, by placing the human factor at the centre: crew welfare, training, and trust in digital systems are its foundations. And finally, by building trust in data. Sharing anonymised incident data must be matched by deploying tools that turn real-time inputs into actionable insights.
Safety in a complex era. Shipping is entering one of the most challenging decades in its history. Decarbonisation, automation, cyber risk, and geopolitical instability are converging, making operations more complex than ever. In this environment, safety cannot be left to fragmented systems and overstretched crews. We have an opportunity—and an obligation—to reset how safety is managed. The path forward lies in clarity, integration, and collaboration. Giving crews the tools to see clearly and act decisively is the key to reducing persistent distress calls and building a safer, more resilient industry.