Port state control (PSC) detentions are becoming an increasingly significant operational and financial threat for shipowners and operators, as ageing fleets, tighter maintenance budgets and growing compliance pressures expose weaknesses in vessel safety and operational readiness.
That is the key finding of a new white paper released by Survitec, titled In-port Detentions: The costs and implications for an ageing fleet – and how to avoid them. According to the safety and survival technology specialist, many of today’s detentions are no longer the result of unexpected failures, but rather of deficiencies that are visible, foreseeable and often entirely preventable.
Survitec warns that even a short detention can quickly generate substantial costs once factors such as off-hire periods, berth charges, emergency repairs, schedule disruptions, insurance implications and reputational damage are taken into account.
“Detention is increasingly becoming part of the operating environment for many fleets,” said Metkel Yohannes, Chief Portfolio Officer at Survitec. “The commercial reality is simple. Proactive annual inspections and lifecycle planning significantly reduce the risk of costly compliance failures and operational disruption. Investing in prevention is materially cheaper than absorbing even one detention.”
While the number of global PSC inspections has remained relatively stable at around 75,000 annually, detention rates have deteriorated noticeably in recent years.
According to the report, detentions under the Tokyo Memorandum of Understanding (Tokyo MoU) have more than doubled over the past five years. Meanwhile, the Black Sea MoU has recorded some of the highest detention rates relative to inspection volumes, a trend partly attributed to the concentration of older vessels operating within the region.
The findings highlight growing concerns as the global fleet continues to age. Combined with budget constraints, reduced crew availability and increasingly compressed maintenance schedules, more ships are entering inspections without fully meeting compliance requirements, particularly in areas involving safety-critical equipment.
Many of the deficiencies identified by inspectors are directly linked to the operational readiness of lifesaving appliances and fire safety systems—equipment that plays a vital role during onboard emergencies.
“As the case studies show, these types of failures rarely occur in isolation or suddenly,” said Jan-Oskar Lid, Technical Sales and Support Manager at Survitec. “They highlight the critical role of rigorous, standards-based inspection regimes in identifying hidden risks before they escalate.”
The report argues that operators must shift their focus from reactive maintenance to proactive lifecycle management if they want to reduce detention exposure and maintain operational continuity.
“Operators must ensure safety-critical equipment works when it counts to reduce risk, avoid costly failures, and ultimately protect lives,” Yohannes added.
As regulatory oversight intensifies and fleets continue to age, the report suggests that robust inspection programs, preventive maintenance strategies and long-term asset management will become increasingly important not only for compliance but also for safeguarding commercial performance in a highly competitive shipping market.
