For twenty years, tanker vetting preparation had a workable shortcut. VIQ7 presented a fixed questionnaire of roughly 300 questions, and a competent crew could learn it. SIRE 2.0 removed that option deliberately. Each inspection now runs against a Compiled Vessel Inspection Questionnaire of approximately 100 questions, generated algorithmically from a much larger Question Library based on vessel type, equipment, operational history, PIQ declarations and which rotational questions have already been assigned. No two consecutive inspections on the same vessel carry the same set. Roughly half are Core questions covering catastrophic and severe risk areas and appear essentially every time; Rotational 1 questions surface every third or fourth inspection, Rotational 2 around every sixth, with Campaign and Conditional questions layered on by vessel type and risk profile. Every question is then assessed across three elements — Hardware, Process and Human — and the human element is assessed directly, with crew observed and questioned on whether they can actually perform a task rather than whether a procedure exists on paper. Preparation stopped being something a crew can revise for and became something a fleet has to maintain continuously. Start a free trial of Marine Inspection and see what continuous readiness looks like across a tanker fleet.
The old regime
~300
Fixed questions, identical every inspection
A standardised questionnaire with largely binary answers and free-text comments. Crews could learn the set. Preparation was an event before a vetting window, and it worked.
SIRE 2.0
~100
Bespoke questions, different every inspection
A risk-based questionnaire compiled by algorithm from the full Question Library, checked against each vessel's own history so consecutive inspections deliberately differ. Crews must be ready for the whole library.
The consequence is structural rather than incremental. You cannot revise for a questionnaire you will not see until the inspector arrives, so readiness has to be a maintained state across the entire library rather than a push before a window.
Anatomy of a Compiled Vessel Inspection Questionnaire
Understanding how the CVIQ is assembled tells you what a software platform actually has to track. Each category behaves differently, and the ones that appear rarely are the ones crews are least prepared for. Book a Marine Inspection demo and see question coverage mapped across your own vessels.
Core
Essentially every inspection
Around half of every CVIQ. Covers the fundamental safety and pollution-prevention areas classified as catastrophic or severe risk. Predictable, and therefore the area where crews are usually strongest.
Rotational 1
Every third or fourth inspection
Appears infrequently enough that a crew rotation may have turned over entirely since the last time a vessel saw a given question. This is where preparation gaps concentrate.
Rotational 2
Around every sixth inspection
Rarer still. At a typical inspection cadence, a vessel may go years between exposures, and nobody currently on board will have seen the question answered.
Campaign
While a campaign is active
Focused inspection campaigns target a specific area for a defined period, applying heightened scrutiny across the tanker fleet regardless of operating region. Campaigns rotate, so confirm which is currently active before every inspection window.
Conditional
Triggered by your own declarations
Driven by vessel type and risk profile, and by what you declare. Cargo type entries trigger specific questions, and if ship-to-ship operations are expected but not selected in the PIQ, STS questions will not be included at all.
The algorithm checks each vessel's question history, so the categories a vessel has recently covered are the ones least likely to reappear. Preparation that follows the last inspection report is preparation aimed at the wrong questions.
Three Elements, and Why One Defect Becomes Several Observations
This is the mechanism tanker operators most often underestimate. Every question can be assessed across three elements, so a single physical shortcoming rarely produces a single finding. Sign up for Marine Inspection and convert findings into tracked work before they multiply.
Hardware
Is the equipment, structure or system present, correctly installed and in good working order?
The traditional inspection focus, and the element most fleets already manage well through planned maintenance.
Process
Does a documented procedure exist, and does it reflect how the task is actually performed?
A gap between the safety management system and shipboard practice registers here even where the hardware is faultless.
Human
Can the crew genuinely perform the task, and do they understand why?
Assessed directly through observation and interview. A procedure nobody can execute is a finding, and human factors carry into recommendations affecting the vetting decision.
Up to 6
Observations from a single defect
Because one shortcoming can register across multiple chapters and multiple elements, a single unaddressed item can generate up to six separate observations in one report. Every negative observation is codified with a Subject of Concern, a Nature of Concern and mandatory Performance Influencing Factor attribution, which makes findings searchable and comparable across vessels — useful to you for trend analysis, and equally useful to every charterer reading the report. Note also that the Hardware and Process response tools do not include positive observations, so there is no offsetting credit for what is working.
What Tanker Inspection Software Has to Do
The requirements below follow directly from how SIRE 2.0 operates rather than from a generic feature list. The final column is the test that settles each one inside a demo. Schedule a walkthrough and run them against your own fleet data.
Table 1: Capability Requirements for Tanker Fleet Inspection Software
| Requirement | Why SIRE 2.0 Demands It | What Good Looks Like | Test in the Demo |
|---|---|---|---|
| CVIQ coverage tracking | The algorithm checks question history, so consecutive inspections deliberately differ across a large library | Per-vessel record of which Core, Rotational, Campaign and Conditional categories have been covered, with gaps flagged | Ask which rotational categories your oldest vessel has not seen in three inspections |
| Photo repository management | Standardised vessel photographs must be maintained current within six months across safety-critical equipment, cargo areas, accommodation and engine spaces | Systematic collection, dating and organisation per vessel with expiry visibility across the fleet | Show which vessels have repository images approaching the six-month limit |
| Observation to corrective action | Negative observations must become tracked tasks with deadlines, owners and completion evidence, and the next inspector verifies remediation | One-step conversion of a finding into a work order or SMS corrective action with automated follow-up | Convert a real observation into an assigned task inside the demo |
| PIF trend analysis | Every negative observation carries mandatory Performance Influencing Factor attribution, making human-factor patterns visible across a fleet | Aggregation of PIF data across inspections to identify systemic issues for targeted training | Ask which PIF appears most often across your last ten inspections |
| Human element preparation | Crew are observed and questioned on genuine operational competence rather than procedural existence | Competence evidence linked to the people who performed the work, and internal audits run against the library | Produce evidence that a named crew member has performed a specific critical task |
| Declaration accuracy | HVPQ and PIQ entries drive the questionnaire, and cargo type and STS declarations trigger specific question sets | Declaration data held and reviewed as a maintained record rather than completed under time pressure | Show when each vessel's declarations were last reviewed, and by whom |
| Offline capture | Internal preparation happens at sea, where connectivity is intermittent or absent | Full create, edit and submit offline with photographs, syncing on reconnection | Airplane mode, complete an internal inspection with photos, then reconnect |
| Fleet-wide cascade | Findings on one vessel predict findings on sisters, and the library is common across the fleet | Patterns from each inspection feeding preparation on every other vessel | Ask how a finding on one tanker reaches the master of another |
| Adjacent regimes | The same readiness carries into PSC, chemical-sector vetting under CDI and charterer inspection regimes | One evidence base serving several questionnaires rather than parallel preparation efforts | Generate a PSC-oriented pack from the same underlying records |
2026 TANKER COMPLIANCE REALITY
Campaign questions rotate, so verify the current one. Focused inspection campaigns target a specific area for a defined period and apply heightened scrutiny across the tanker fleet regardless of operating region. Any campaign named in a published guide, including this one, may have closed — confirm the active campaign directly through OCIMF before each inspection window. Reports persist and are read. The OCIMF database retains reports for a defined period and the next inspector verifies whether previous findings were remediated, so an unclosed observation is not a historical item but an active exposure. Vetting sits on top of statutory obligation, not instead of it. ISM Code Element 10 requires a documented maintenance system, SOLAS Chapter IX makes ISM mandatory for SOLAS-certified ships, and Port State Control operates independently of any charterer regime. Photographs cut both ways. Images supplied by the operator before an inspection and images captured by the inspector both appear in the final report, and inspectors review operator photographs before boarding and validate them against conditions found on board.
100
questions you cannot predict
Track which Core, Rotational, Campaign and Conditional categories each vessel has covered, keep photo repositories current within the six-month window, and convert every negative observation into a tracked corrective action with a deadline, an owner and completion evidence. Built for tanker operators running fleets where every CVIQ is different and every inspector checks what the last one found.
Four Problems That Only Appear at Fleet Scale
Managing SIRE 2.0 for one tanker is demanding but tractable. Across ten, twenty or fifty vessels, each with different inspection histories, different rotational coverage, different declarations and different crew rotations, four specific problems break manual tracking. Start a free trial and check how many your fleet currently absorbs by hand.
Problem 1
Coverage Drift Across the Fleet
Every vessel carries a different position in the rotational cycle. Vessel A has just seen a Rotational 2 category it will not meet again for years; Vessel B is due one nobody aboard has encountered. Without a per-vessel coverage map, preparation is aimed at whatever the last report contained, which is precisely the material the algorithm is least likely to repeat.
NeedsA coverage matrix by vessel and category, with gaps ranked by likelihood of appearing next.
Problem 2
The Rolling Six-Month Photo Cycle
Repository images must stay current within six months across safety-critical equipment, cargo areas, accommodation and engine spaces. On one vessel that is a diary entry. Across a fleet it is a continuous rolling obligation with a different due date per ship, and inspectors review those images before boarding and check them against what they find.
NeedsPer-vessel repository status with expiry visibility and structured capture at the point of the photograph.
Problem 3
Observations That Are Noted, Not Closed
A finding recorded in a report and a finding converted into an assigned task with a deadline are different things, and only the second survives contact with the next inspection. Because the following inspector checks whether previous observations were remediated, an item noted and forgotten reappears with the added weight of having been known about.
NeedsOne-step conversion from observation to work order or SMS corrective action, with evidence attached at closure.
Problem 4
Human Factors Invisible in Aggregate
Mandatory Performance Influencing Factor attribution on every negative observation makes human-factor causes comparable across vessels for the first time. That is only useful if somebody aggregates it. One report shows an isolated lapse; forty reports show a systemic training gap that targeted intervention can actually fix.
NeedsPIF aggregation across the fleet, feeding training priorities rather than sitting in individual reports.
Evaluating a Platform for a Tanker Fleet
Run this against every shortlisted platform. It targets the capabilities SIRE 2.0 specifically creates demand for, rather than the general maintenance features every vendor claims. Book a walkthrough and work through it with a marine superintendent present.
Table 2: Buyer Questions and What Separates a Real Answer From a Claim
| Area | The Question | A Real Answer | What Should Worry You |
|---|---|---|---|
| Question library | Can we run an internal inspection against the full library, not just recent findings? | The library structure is present and filterable by chapter and category | A generic checklist builder you are expected to populate yourself |
| Coverage history | Which categories has each vessel covered, and where are the gaps? | A per-vessel matrix produced live, from your data | An offer to export inspection dates into a spreadsheet |
| Three elements | Does an internal inspection assess Hardware, Process and Human separately? | Three distinct response paths per question, with human factors captured | A single pass or fail per question, which is the VIQ7 model |
| Photo repository | How do we know which vessels are approaching the six-month expiry? | Repository status per vessel with dates visible fleet-wide | Photographs stored as attachments with no expiry concept |
| Corrective actions | How does an observation become a maintenance job with an owner and a deadline? | Demonstrated in one step during the demo on a real finding | A workflow requiring re-entry into a separate maintenance system |
| Offline | Can a chief officer complete an internal inspection at sea with no connectivity? | Airplane mode demonstration with photographs, then a clean sync | Read-only offline, or an assurance that connectivity is usually adequate |
| Adjacent regimes | Does the same evidence base serve PSC and chemical-sector vetting? | One record producing several output formats | Separate modules requiring the same work to be recorded twice |
| Reference | Which tanker operators of our size and trade use this today? | A named, contactable reference with a comparable fleet | Logos with no reachable person behind them |
Frequently Asked Questions
What is a CVIQ and how does it differ from the old VIQ7?
The Compiled Vessel Inspection Questionnaire is the backbone of SIRE 2.0. Where VIQ7 used a fixed set of roughly 300 standardised questions with largely binary answers, each CVIQ is generated algorithmically — approximately 100 questions drawn from a much larger Question Library and tailored to vessel type, equipment, operational history, PIQ declarations and which rotational questions have already been assigned. The algorithm checks each vessel's history so consecutive inspections deliberately differ. The practical consequence is that a crew cannot prepare by learning the questionnaire, because they will not see it until the inspector arrives.
How often do rotational questions appear?
Core questions make up around half of every CVIQ and appear essentially every inspection, covering the areas classified as catastrophic or severe risk. Rotational 1 questions surface roughly every third or fourth inspection, and Rotational 2 questions around every sixth. Campaign questions apply while a focused campaign is active, and Conditional questions are driven by vessel type, risk profile and your own declarations. The rotational categories are where preparation gaps concentrate, because at typical inspection intervals an entire crew rotation can turn over between one appearance and the next.
What are the Photo Repository requirements?
Operators must maintain standardised vessel photographs updated every six months, covering safety-critical equipment, cargo areas, accommodation and engine spaces. Inspectors review these images before boarding and validate them against the conditions they find on board, and photographs from both the operator and the inspector appear in the published report. Across a fleet this becomes a rolling obligation with a different due date per vessel, which is why repository management is one of the four areas where manual tracking fails first. Treat it as a scheduled recurring task rather than a pre-inspection scramble.
Why can one defect generate several observations?
Because every question can be assessed across three elements — Hardware, Process and Human — and a single shortcoming can register across more than one chapter as well. A defective item that also reveals a procedure not matching practice, and a crew member unable to demonstrate the task, produces findings in all three elements, and a single defect can generate up to six separate observations in one report. Every negative observation is codified with a Subject of Concern, a Nature of Concern and mandatory Performance Influencing Factor attribution, and the Hardware and Process response tools do not include positive observations, so nothing offsets them.
Does SIRE 2.0 preparation help with PSC and CDI inspections?
Substantially, because the underlying readiness is the same. The Hardware, Process and Human framework that SIRE 2.0 assesses is the same readiness that determines outcomes under Port State Control and under chemical-sector vetting through CDI, and the same maintenance evidence, competence records and corrective action trail serve all three. The efficiency gain comes from maintaining one evidence base that produces several output formats rather than running parallel preparation efforts. What does not transfer is the questionnaire itself, so confirm each regime's own current requirements separately rather than assuming SIRE readiness covers them by default.
You Cannot Revise for a Questionnaire You Will Not See
So stop trying, and maintain the state instead
Coverage tracked per vessel across every question category, photo repositories current within the six-month window, negative observations converted into assigned work with completion evidence, and Performance Influencing Factors aggregated across the fleet so human-factor patterns become training priorities. Offline on the device your officers already carry.
