|
Post by old_wsf_fan on Jul 29, 2006 18:41:14 GMT -8
Just sitting here bored out of my mind. Does anybody know if there has been a decision on who is going to build the new vessels, their capacity, and timeline of delivery?
I am not speaking of any of the info on the WSF website concerning the new vessels. Maybe somebody knows info that has not been released yet.
Have they decided on the conventional design or the new Martinac style? Has the State of Washington finished accepting bids on the new boats?
Any news is good news........
|
|
|
Post by Political Incorrectness on Jul 29, 2006 19:19:59 GMT -8
The new Martinac style was voted down in favor of a mini Jumbo Mark II design, I loved that Martinac design. The state may already have the contract handed down to Todd but I am not sure. If you want more info, I would ask someone inside the DOT if they can give more info.
|
|
|
Post by SS San Mateo on Jul 29, 2006 19:44:57 GMT -8
I believe the bidding process (actually it'll be a re-bidding process) will happen next year. New timeline has the 1'st boat delivered in 2009. Todd was awarded the contract last year, but Martinac appealed the decision (and won the appeal).
The new vessels will hold 144 cars (originally it was 130, but WSF decided to go with 144 after they decided to built a 5'th new ferry and they figured it would make more sense to go with 5 144 car boats instead of 4 130 and 1 144).
-- LB
|
|
|
Post by old_wsf_fan on Aug 2, 2006 20:25:25 GMT -8
On the WSF website there is info about the new vessels that are about to be built. If you read the information closely there is no mention of any vessel changes on the Pt. Townsend/Keystone route with the introduction of the new ferries. I thought that was the reason for building these boats in the first place.
I know that the Keystone harbor needs changing before any other vessels are used, but it seems as though they are putting the " cart before the horse" in not having a plan in place to deal with remodelling or replacing the dock and still having to use the old steel-electrics in the interim....
For the record, I still enjoy riding those old boats....
|
|
|
Post by hergfest on Aug 2, 2006 21:41:00 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by Political Incorrectness on Aug 2, 2006 21:47:39 GMT -8
The long range plan said the Evergreen was going to be revived to serve the inter island route. BTW "this vessel is supposed to have the latest technologies" are rudders the latest technology? They forgot about azipods.
|
|
|
Post by hergfest on Aug 2, 2006 23:47:26 GMT -8
No other WSF vessel has pods, so why use them when a standard rudder and prop will work? By not using them it keeps maintenance costs down, and the vessels all interchange. Plus it is an unproven technology to WSF.
|
|
|
Post by SS San Mateo on Aug 3, 2006 6:25:15 GMT -8
I noticed something interesting in the new design... the evacuation system is on the passenger deck (like the BC ferries) instead of the car deck (which results in having to have passageways that take up car deck space and reduced capacity).
-- LB
|
|
|
Post by In Washington on Aug 3, 2006 6:56:29 GMT -8
See today's article at this website "kitsapsun.com"
|
|
|
Post by Political Incorrectness on Aug 3, 2006 12:59:45 GMT -8
I'll just look at the paper, SS, that is much smarter to have MECs up top versus on the car deck, it is a mob when you have to unload from the car deck for passengers if an overheadloading span is broken. That is what BCFerries did with there major vessels.
|
|
|
Post by SS San Mateo on Aug 10, 2006 7:27:16 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by hergfest on Aug 10, 2006 9:35:16 GMT -8
According to WSF's long range plan, that run is only getting one of the new boats.
|
|
|
Post by SS San Mateo on Aug 21, 2006 14:55:43 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by old_wsf_fan on Aug 24, 2006 21:14:57 GMT -8
It is unfortunate for the State that Martinac is engaging in lawsuits again. The State has decided that the current design is satisfactory for their needs. The State has said more than once that they are trying to eliminate vessels that differ from one another to help control costs.
If they accept the Martinac design, it will just add vessels to the fleet that are radically different than other boats in the fleet.
Does Martinac think that if they continue to sue the State that it will eventually accept the design? And what is this going to do for the Steel-Electrics? If this lawsuit comes to terms, it will delay the replacement of the old boats for probably another 1-2 years.
I just shake my head in disgust at the amount of money wasted on something like this...........
|
|
|
Post by SS San Mateo on Aug 25, 2006 7:33:05 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by EGfleet on Aug 25, 2006 8:27:43 GMT -8
Boy they've got some nerve! They're the ones that delayed the new boats in the first place! The first one would have been on the water this fall if it hadn't been for their lawsuit in the first place! Martinec isn't going to be happy until the state hands them the contract with a gold ribbon.
|
|
|
Post by SS San Mateo on Aug 25, 2006 11:14:26 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by old_wsf_fan on Aug 25, 2006 17:24:35 GMT -8
Since the ferry system may not get the new vessels for quite some time due to litigation, it looks like they will need to keep the Steels running and in good order so they reach their 100 birthdays...... yeah right. An even better idea is to buy the Willipa, scavenge what is left of that boat to keep the others going and repair the Nisqually. Of course since the engines were replaced with direct drive back in the 40's, looks like nothing is there to repair the Nisqually. Wow..... more great ideas. Just being a little cheeky in throwing around our tax money with proposterous ideas, well back to the subject.
It seems like Martinac has been a thorn in WSF side for a long time. It is unfortunate that this kind of problem is coming to the surface when we all know that the new vessels are really needed.
Why doesn't Martinac come back with a design that is more in line with what the WSF needs instead of trying to shove their design on them?
|
|
|
Post by Electric Thunderbird on Aug 28, 2006 12:34:23 GMT -8
Wouldn't a couple of Z-Drive vessels be far cheaper than spending a billion dollars plus court costs fighting off the natives to rebuild/relocate the Keystone harbor? Martinac may have a point.
However having a fleet of identical ships does save costs. Southwest's all Boeing 737 is a working example even wth it being airplanes.
|
|
|
Post by hergfest on Aug 28, 2006 17:24:11 GMT -8
The other fact is that they would have to build at least two of them so they can have a boat there for maintance.
|
|
|
Post by hergfest on Aug 29, 2006 20:34:29 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by Political Incorrectness on Aug 29, 2006 22:52:07 GMT -8
Seriously, get the commuters started on the issue, then you can rally some support.
|
|
|
Post by SS San Mateo on Aug 30, 2006 10:47:26 GMT -8
Wouldn't a couple of Z-Drive vessels be far cheaper than spending a billion dollars plus court costs fighting off the natives to rebuild/relocate the Keystone harbor? Martinac may have a point. Even if they went with Z-Drive vessels, Keystone Harbor would still have to be reconfigured (I'm assuming the larger boats wouldn't fit at low tides). I wonder where they came up with the billion dollar figure for Keystone. That seems an awful lot.
|
|
|
Post by SS Shasta on Aug 30, 2006 18:26:09 GMT -8
Since the ferry system may not get the new vessels for quite some time due to litigation, it looks like they will need to keep the Steels running and in good order so they reach their 100 birthdays...... yeah right. Actually I believe it is a poor decision to use "getting rid of the steel electrics" as the justification for the new construction. The system priority should be to promote the new vessels as a way to place 3rd vessels on many of the busy routes during summer week ends. Waiting 3 and 4 hours at Edmonds/Kingston/Clinton etc. is not acceptable service. Why not spend some money in keeping the steel-electrics in good order so that they can reach their 100 birthdays? Keep two running on the Port Townsend-Keystone run to avoid costly harbor reconstruction. Use the new vessels (if/when they are built) to add 3rd vessels to the busy routes.
|
|
|
Post by Political Incorrectness on Aug 30, 2006 18:30:22 GMT -8
Either way, it is going to cost, the Steel's are not worth upkeeping due to the fact of their age. They have been long overdue for replacement.
You need two Supers at Mukliteo-Clinton, with these new vessels I believe they carry as much as the Supers. The Evergreen State needs to be on shuttle service from Edmonds on Fridays and Kingston on Sundays.
|
|