|
Post by ruddernut on Jan 22, 2008 16:30:29 GMT -8
Would it make good economic and/or environmental sense to run passenger ferries whose routes are essentially parallel to existing car ferries on high traffic corridors (eg. Vancouver-Nanaimo, Vancouver-Victoria)? Some arguments I can think of for and against: For: - Transporting passengers on smaller, more fuel efficient passenger ferries, especially if the start and end points of the sailing are at more convenient locations (eg. downtown to downtown), may reduce the number of cars driven for the trip, thus the number of sailings needed by the big fuel consuming expensive to operate car ferries, not to mention the fuel consumed by the cars driven.
- Smaller passenger ferries travel faster and get you there quicker if you don't need a car.
Against: - It costs almost next to nothing to just let on foot passengers on the car ferries, yet helps to recover more of the cost and make more efficient use of resources to have them share the ride for the same trip as the cars and drivers.
Do the pros outweigh the cons? Would it be worth it for BCFS to run downtown-to-downtown passenger ferry service on these routes?
|
|
Nick
Voyager
Chief Engineer - Queen of Richmond
Posts: 2,078
|
Post by Nick on Jan 22, 2008 16:44:27 GMT -8
I have one word for you - HarbourLynx.
It's been done. It doesn't work, as you said it costs next to nothing to let footies on the vehicle ferries.
As far as the efficiency goes, I don't think it would make a big difference, as long as the vehicle ship is running at the same time, since there isn't a big difference in fuel consumption between empty and full.
When HarbourLynx was running, BCF said they noticed a very minimal drop in the traffic numbers, so I don't think it would divert a lot of traffic.
|
|
|
Post by ruddernut on Jan 22, 2008 16:50:22 GMT -8
But HarbourLynx didn't enjoy the subsidies that BCF did, and its fares were expensive, weren't they?
|
|
|
Post by coastalcody on Jan 22, 2008 17:08:41 GMT -8
No passenger service is going to be able to make such an impact on bc ferries that they want to. Maybe 5 percent of the bc ferry riders would take the harbour lynx, probably not even. Sure its fun and fast but then you have to pay for taxis and buses, and how ever else your going to get to the destination. That just gets you to land. If you were going to victoria and took that harbour lynx, your price would be more then taking a car on the ferry. So bc ferries would not waste money on passenger ferries which would end up making them lose money.
|
|
Nick
Voyager
Chief Engineer - Queen of Richmond
Posts: 2,078
|
Post by Nick on Jan 22, 2008 17:12:53 GMT -8
That is a fair point, that HarbourLynx didn't have the government subsidy.
However, if BCF were to do the same type of thing, and have a high speed passenger only ferry, the fares would have to be more than 10 bucks in order to break even, since the vehicles pay more than their "fair" share of the operating costs (especially commercial vehicles). Remember, BCF won't start any new services that don't make money, now that they are "private".
In another example of a passenger only ferry duplicating a vehicle route, I will direct your attention to the MV Chinook and Snohomish that WSF had built for exactly that purpose on the Bremerton-Seattle run (I think?? maybe somebody more familiar with WSF operations can confirm). Those ferries didn't work out either. And they were heavily subsidized by WSDOT/WSF.
|
|
|
Post by ferrytraveller on Jan 22, 2008 17:16:00 GMT -8
well thats not exactly true, like ruddernut said, If the foot passenger ferries could drop people of downtown victoria or vancouver, that would be right in front of offices for those people. I know people who come to my school (BCIT Marine Campus) in North Vancouver and all they would have to do is jump on the seabus to get to school. they use to use harbourlynks but now have to spend hours on bc ferries waiting to get home. BC ferries could run a passenger only ferry and make a profit, while doing it!
|
|
|
Post by ruddernut on Jan 22, 2008 17:20:07 GMT -8
However, if BCF were to do the same type of thing, and have a high speed passenger only ferry, the fares would have to be more than 10 bucks in order to break even Sounds like a pretty good deal still. I believe passenger fares are something like $14 now on the car ferries?
|
|
|
Post by kylefossett on Jan 22, 2008 17:20:11 GMT -8
well thats not exactly true, like ruddernut said, If the foot passenger ferries could drop people of downtown victoria or vancouver, that would be right in front of offices for those people. I know people who come to my school (BCIT Marine Campus) in North Vancouver and all they would have to do is jump on the seabus to get to school. they use to use harbourlynks but now have to spend hours on bc ferries waiting to get home. BC ferries could run a passenger only ferry and make a profit, while doing it! Royal Sealink ran from Vic Harbour to Van Harbour and didn't work. It has been tried now from both Nanaimo and Victoria and both times the run has sunk.
|
|
Nick
Voyager
Chief Engineer - Queen of Richmond
Posts: 2,078
|
Post by Nick on Jan 22, 2008 17:20:20 GMT -8
Maybe there is a possibility of it making a profit, if it was downtown to downtown service, at a low enough fare that it will divert footies from the primary routes. It would also have to be frequent enough service to be convenient.
I really don't think that there would be enough traffic to utilize such a service. Similar services have been tried before, and they didn't work out. It would take a very large capital investment as well, to obtain harbour landing areas, as well as a ship efficient enough to keep operating costs minimal.
|
|
|
Post by Scott on Jan 22, 2008 22:20:45 GMT -8
It's probably along the lines of skytrain. Build it and they will come. But good luck if you're trying to make a profit "while they come". If people could plan on a dependable, fast, frequent, affordable link from downtown to downtown that was guarenteed to be there for the long term and was something that could be built around, then I think it would be very successful. More people would move to Nanaimo and work in Vancouver. Eventually you might see Nanaimo's waterfront area become more like North Vancouver's, with more high-rises and denser residential neighbourhoods. You'd have closer links to the cities and improved commerce. It would eventually steamroll and become more intergrated. You'd have improved transit in Nanaimo connecting the surrounding region to the ferry terminal.
If it's going to depend on private, unsubsidized investment, it will take a long time before we see a permanent passenger-only service.
|
|
|
Post by Ferryman on Jan 22, 2008 23:05:21 GMT -8
I wouldn't totally shoot down the idea of having any sort of passenger only service running ever again. I seem to recall some media releases, stating that there was a group interested in a Downtown Victoria to Downtown Vancouver run again. With Harbourlynx, I seem to remember (lack of) parking being an issue. Though I could be wrong, seeming that's more of an instinct thought.
I wouldn't doubt that passenger only Ferry service has crossed BC Ferries mind. The thing is, I could see them considering the theory being: Passengers will want maximum amenties, and to be able to provide those amenties, means a bigger ship and more crew. Now BC Ferries is getting these (slightly) larger Ferries, with a few more bells and whistles from the current setup.
While I was in Massachussettes, I found it interesting to see the competitive advertising, between the Ferry companies out there. There was about 3 ( that I can think of) different companies providing service to Marthas Vineyard, and Nantucket Island. The big one of them all, was obviously the Steamship Authority Ferries. Then there were Hyline Cruises, and the New England Fast Ferry. These were high speed catarmaran type services. The Steamship Authority recently built a high speed passenger only catarmaran Ferry, to provide service between Hyannis, on Cape Cod, to Nantucket. It was following the same route and using the same terminals as the vehicle Ferries do. Sort of a similar situation to WSFs Fastcats, but with only one vessel this time. I believe the Catamaran does the route in less than half the time the conventional vessels do the route to Nantucket. But the fare was also about double the cost.
If a passenger only service was to really try to compete, I'd think they'd have to do a Route 1 or 2 crossing in less than an hour, to really be worth the extra few bucks. But as usual, I've always thought the weather out on the Strait isn't always exactly perfect conditions for fast efficient service. Also, I wouldn't doubt that alot of people are intimidated by travelling on a smaller, potentially unstable vessel, compared to the big ones.
|
|
|
Post by Hardy on Jan 22, 2008 23:59:28 GMT -8
For any parallel service to work, even if it is downtown to downtown (ie: better footie routing than the existing boats), there are several things that have to be considered, in order for it to turn a profit and draw the passengers.
One is speed of service. You have to get there faster than the service you are competing against (simply saying that you are going downtown to downtown and avoiding outlying terminals is NOT enough).
Two is cost. You have to charge enough to cover costs (at least long term, you can afford to lose some $$$ on startup) BUT also charge little enough to attract enough pax. This is the real catch-22 - how much is too much yet how little is not enough?
Three is amenities. BCFS has this one sewn up for the short term, insofar as their "coastalization". You have to have food service, seating etc. Granted, if you have a quick/short enough crossing, you can get by with prepackaged snack fare and beverages, as opposed to fullservice food, but that is still an amenity that should not be casually overlooked.
Four is the vessels themselves. We can all just see the horror stories of an inadequate boat not suited for the purpose being stuck on a route that it has no hope of having a future doing. Nuff said on this measure, as we can all fill in the blanks on that one ourselves!
Just a few of the things to consider. I am sure that I have missed some, but these are the ones that stick out the most in my mind when I read this thread.
|
|
|
Post by ruddernut on Jan 23, 2008 2:34:45 GMT -8
Any typical passenger ferry vessel with about a 300 passenger capacity ought to be big and stable enough to offer a safe, smooth and comfortable enough ride over all conditions on the Strait of Georgia, no?
|
|
|
Post by ruddernut on Jan 23, 2008 8:32:42 GMT -8
As far as the efficiency goes, I don't think it would make a big difference, as long as the vehicle ship is running at the same time, since there isn't a big difference in fuel consumption between empty and full. The question is, though, will the availability of a passenger only alternative reduce the number of sailings that need to be made with the big boats? If so, it would be worth considering.
|
|
|
Post by ruddernut on Jan 23, 2008 8:34:45 GMT -8
It's probably along the lines of skytrain. Build it and they will come. But good luck if you're trying to make a profit "while they come". If people could plan on a dependable, fast, frequent, affordable link from downtown to downtown that was guarenteed to be there for the long term and was something that could be built around, then I think it would be very successful. More people would move to Nanaimo and work in Vancouver. Eventually you might see Nanaimo's waterfront area become more like North Vancouver's, with more high-rises and denser residential neighbourhoods. You'd have closer links to the cities and improved commerce. It would eventually steamroll and become more intergrated. You'd have improved transit in Nanaimo connecting the surrounding region to the ferry terminal. I think a $30 daily commute would still be too much for most people.
|
|
|
Post by DENelson83 on Jan 23, 2008 8:38:52 GMT -8
Eventually you might see Nanaimo's waterfront area become more like North Vancouver's, with more high-rises and denser residential neighbourhoods. You'd have closer links to the cities and improved commerce. Good luck trying that. All you'll end up doing is bringing out all the NIMBYs.
|
|
|
Post by ruddernut on Jan 23, 2008 8:45:57 GMT -8
Eventually you might see Nanaimo's waterfront area become more like North Vancouver's, with more high-rises and denser residential neighbourhoods. You'd have closer links to the cities and improved commerce. Good luck trying that. All you'll end up doing is bringing out all the NIMBYs. They've managed to push through with some highrises in Kelowna, despite the area being full of 90-year-old NIMBYs. Market forces and the demand for housing seem to have a way of winning through...eventually.
|
|
|
Post by Northern Exploration on Jan 23, 2008 9:07:58 GMT -8
Last week I was having dinner with a Vancouver friend and he told me about someone who was serious that Chris's current backyard will be a huge growth area after the Olympics, as well as Nanaimo. The reasoning a developer had given him was the explosion in costs for real estate in Vancouver, the increased interest in the area generated by the Olympics for Whistler, and the real lack of affordable housing for families without going way out the valley and a huge commute. If that is true then maybe the passenger ferries will follow.
Squamish is supposed to benefit from better access because of the upgrades to the Sea to Sky. Given the prices in Whistler and the fact that they will likely only increase leading up to and following the olympics, Squamish is an alternative for Ski Condos with a shorter commute to the ski hill. A shuttle service to Whistler would only increase this. I question how many would be interested in this. It is not a truly parallel service but a high speed passenger ferry downtown could fuel this expansion even more. We have discussed that previously and I have lots of questions about it.
More on point though, the same ideas work for Nanaimo. As the demand for housing creaps up the Island and if there was a reliable passenger ferry service downtown to downtown, people may in fact begin to look at it as a viable commuting option. If BC Ferries were to operate it, it would seem much more stable than the attempts to date. Imagine a multi-level parking garage at Duke point for individuals to park and ride. It is out of the more sensitive residential areas, has room to grow especially up, and would have the room for a transit link as well. An hour from there to downtown Vancouver and it would then begin to make sense.
Once one route was up and running a network could be planned. Then perhaps a Squamish development with the developer being required to build the terminal. Could Langdale support a rush hour service to downtown to take some of the pressure and cars off the traditional ferry? And maybe once the Canada line is up and running how about a tie in to it on the Fraser near the airport. Or a terminal on False Creek to tie in there?
All of them would have to have excellent tie ins to transit to work. And of course all the NIMBY's would be out in force. However in ten or so years or sooner they could all begin to be economically viable.
|
|
|
Post by Nickfro on Jan 23, 2008 9:17:49 GMT -8
One thing to keep in mind with these passenger only routes is 'who are the typical people using them'? A good chunk of the people are usually 'on business', and when you consider the cost of doing business they would typically lean towards using the seaplane from either Victoria or Nanaimo to Vancouver. It's more reliable than a boat and gets you there faster. Even though it costs a fair chunk more, business folk still find the seaplane worth it. The only catch: it doesn't fly at night (Helijet does though, but is more expensive than seaplanes). Therefore the fast passenger ferry would probably do decent business in the dark. Personally I think a passenger ferry from between downtown Vancouver and downtown Victoria would lose to their seaplane competitors due to the 2.5 hour sailing time vs 35 min flying time, regardless of price.
|
|
D'Elete BC in NJ
Voyager
Dispensing gallons of useless information daily...
Posts: 1,671
|
Post by D'Elete BC in NJ on Jan 23, 2008 9:34:34 GMT -8
One thing to keep in mind with these passenger only routes is 'who are the typical people using them'? A good chunk of the people are usually 'on business', and when you consider the cost of doing business they would typically lean towards using the seaplane from either Victoria or Nanaimo to Vancouver. It's more reliable than a boat and gets you there faster. Even though it costs a fair chunk more, business folk still find the seaplane worth it. The only catch: it doesn't fly at night (Helijet does though, but is more expensive than seaplanes). Therefore the fast passenger ferry would probably do decent business in the dark. Personally I think a passenger ferry from between downtown Vancouver and downtown Victoria would lose to their seaplane competitors due to the 2.5 hour sailing time vs 35 min flying time, regardless of price. One really has to look at São Paulo, Brazil to get a good feel for the use of helicopters in the business world. There the traffic is so bad, once wages are calculated in, the most cost effective method of moving business personnel is by air. One needs to argue this same type of cost analysis to the business people of the city to get the support required to make passenger only ferry service viable. Can you show the business world you can make their employees more productive with the service? Or, as pnwt noted, can you make it more affordable for the business people of the city to commute in from the suburbs?
|
|
|
Post by ruddernut on Jan 23, 2008 11:33:06 GMT -8
More on point though, the same ideas work for Nanaimo. As the demand for housing creaps up the Island and if there was a reliable passenger ferry service downtown to downtown, people may in fact begin to look at it as a viable commuting option. If BC Ferries were to operate it, it would seem much more stable than the attempts to date. Imagine a multi-level parking garage at Duke point for individuals to park and ride. It is out of the more sensitive residential areas, has room to grow especially up, and would have the room for a transit link as well. An hour from there to downtown Vancouver and it would then begin to make sense. Daily cross-strait commuting should be discouraged. Marine transport is like the least fuel efficient of them all.
|
|
D'Elete BC in NJ
Voyager
Dispensing gallons of useless information daily...
Posts: 1,671
|
Post by D'Elete BC in NJ on Jan 23, 2008 12:03:09 GMT -8
More on point though, the same ideas work for Nanaimo. As the demand for housing creaps up the Island and if there was a reliable passenger ferry service downtown to downtown, people may in fact begin to look at it as a viable commuting option. If BC Ferries were to operate it, it would seem much more stable than the attempts to date. Imagine a multi-level parking garage at Duke point for individuals to park and ride. It is out of the more sensitive residential areas, has room to grow especially up, and would have the room for a transit link as well. An hour from there to downtown Vancouver and it would then begin to make sense. Daily cross-strait commuting should be discouraged. Marine transport is like the least fuel efficient of them all. ?? Explain how you come up with this. Marine transport is the most fuel efficient mode of transportation when considering cargo. Granted, you can't pack people the same way you pack commodities, but given the proper vessel design, you should at least be able to match the fuel efficiency of buses.
|
|
|
Post by ruddernut on Jan 23, 2008 12:10:25 GMT -8
Daily cross-strait commuting should be discouraged. Marine transport is like the least fuel efficient of them all. ?? Explain how you come up with this. Marine transport is the most fuel efficient mode of transportation when considering cargo. Granted, you can't pack people the same way you pack commodities, but given the proper vessel design, you should at least be able to match the fuel efficiency of buses. Basic physics. Propelling into water counters much more physical resistance than running a wheel over a land surface.
|
|
D'Elete BC in NJ
Voyager
Dispensing gallons of useless information daily...
Posts: 1,671
|
Post by D'Elete BC in NJ on Jan 23, 2008 12:37:19 GMT -8
?? Explain how you come up with this. Marine transport is the most fuel efficient mode of transportation when considering cargo. Granted, you can't pack people the same way you pack commodities, but given the proper vessel design, you should at least be able to match the fuel efficiency of buses. Basic physics. Propelling into water counters much more physical resistance than running a wheel over a land surface. Yes, the drag felt by a body moving through a fluid is greater than the rolling resistance of a wheel. However, that is only part of the frictional load, and the rolling resistance of the tires is only a small portion of the overall friction load. Both bodies also encounter the drag induced by the body moving through the air. Air resistance increases as a combination of the square and cube of the velocity, with the cube becoming more prevalent as speed increases. Since land base vehicles tend to travel at a much higher velocity than ships, this has a very large impact on the resistance load. The friction load/tonne of a ship is much lower than that of a train or bus as it has a much lower surface area to volume ratio. Additionally, a ship has a much lower frontal cross-sectional area/tonne than, say, a bus. Trains have an advantage here as they grow in length which is why they out-perform truck transportation so readily when moving cargo. PS - If you are going to quote physics, you shouldn't do it to a physics grad!
|
|
|
Post by DENelson83 on Jan 23, 2008 15:29:35 GMT -8
|
|