|
Post by Blue Bus Fan on Aug 20, 2013 17:46:15 GMT -8
The Sealth would be a good interisland ferry since oversized vehicles can go anywhere on the car deck. Because they can't on the Tilikum? The Tilikum does have full over height clearance for vehicles. But the Tilikum is slow and has a small passenger count.
|
|
|
Post by northwesterner on Aug 20, 2013 18:00:53 GMT -8
There are limited walk-ons on the Interisland service. Additional passenger space is not really needed. Additionally, if they were to run the Sealth there year round (at Issaquah class speed) they would need to rewrite the entire schedule, as it is currently timed so the Interisland will pull in just as a mainline ferry leaves the berth. Running at service speed, an Issaquah would get to all of the terminals too soon.
|
|
|
Post by Barnacle on Aug 20, 2013 19:44:37 GMT -8
There are limited walk-ons on the Interisland service. Additional passenger space is not really needed. Additionally, if they were to run the Sealth there year round (at Issaquah class speed) they would need to rewrite the entire schedule, as it is currently timed so the Interisland will pull in just as a mainline ferry leaves the berth. Running at service speed, an Issaquah would get to all of the terminals too soon. When the Sealth is running the circuit, they simply don't run the boat at full speed. Not a difficult problem.
|
|
|
Post by Kahloke on Aug 20, 2013 19:53:39 GMT -8
There are limited walk-ons on the Interisland service. Additional passenger space is not really needed. Additionally, if they were to run the Sealth there year round (at Issaquah class speed) they would need to rewrite the entire schedule, as it is currently timed so the Interisland will pull in just as a mainline ferry leaves the berth. Running at service speed, an Issaquah would get to all of the terminals too soon. Eventually, I believe the plan is to have Sealth become the permanent inter-island ferry. As to when this happens, not sure, but Sealth fills in there on a fairly frequent basis now, and they just run her slower when she is working that route, so I don't think it's that big of an impact. At some point down the line, after the Evergreens all get retired, they could probably re-write the schedule to accommodate Sealth's faster speed. Oops! Barnacle beat me to it. I must have been typing my response when he posted. Oh well, I'm leaving my answer in anyway.
|
|
|
Post by Barnacle on Aug 21, 2013 4:30:40 GMT -8
The Elwha sure can be assigned to Seattle-Bremerton. It just has to slow down in the narrowest part of Rich Passage. Actually I think camelot is technically correct. It is my understanding that it is difficult for the Elwha to serve at Bremerton except in an emergency like Salish did last year. What I had heard (though cannot recall from where) is that per the Coast Guard regs her international SOLAS capacity of 1000 something passengers is her passenger capacity period. It cannot be bumped easily up to the regular super capacity "on the fly" when she operates on a domestic only run not requiring SOLAS regs without recertifying the boat, adding an unecessary paperwork/inspection mess. This makes her a worse boat to serve on the route than Kitsap in terms of capacity, although people would be more comfortable for sure. That is why she spends almost all her time in the San Juans. She never hits that limit or close to it. Nope, not true. The Elwha's Certificate of Inspection says she can carry up to 2000 passengers domestically. There is absolutely no reason it can't work at Bremerton.
|
|
|
Post by chokai on Aug 21, 2013 8:19:07 GMT -8
Nope, not true. The Elwha's Certificate of Inspection says she can carry up to 2000 passengers domestically. There is absolutely no reason it can't work at Bremerton. Thanks for correcting me. I couldn't remember where I'd heard that just that I'd heard it. You are afterall pretty much the authoritative source around here on her. ;-)
|
|
|
Post by Barnacle on Aug 22, 2013 8:23:31 GMT -8
Nope, not true. The Elwha's Certificate of Inspection says she can carry up to 2000 passengers domestically. There is absolutely no reason it can't work at Bremerton. Thanks for correcting me. I couldn't remember where I'd heard that just that I'd heard it. You are afterall pretty much the authoritative source around here on her. ;-) I don't know about that, but at least I know where to look on the documents.
|
|
|
Post by Cascadian Transport on Sept 29, 2013 12:32:26 GMT -8
I have been thinking recently about the future. I have another idea for Future Positioning and new builds.
BY SUMMER 2014 Tokitae enters service at Clinton. She displaces Kittitas to work the Triangle. Also, a Super and a Jumbo at Bremerton. Period. Kitsap works the triangle. Also, WSF should re-engine the KdT's to make them more fuel efficient. One per year during off-season. Summer 2014 vessel positioning: Point Defiance: Chetzemoka Vashon Island: Issaquah, Kittitas, Kitsap Bremerton: Walla Walla, Elwha Bainbridge: Wenatchee, Tacoma Kingston: Puyallup, Spokane Clinton: Tokitae, Cathlamet Port Townsend: Kennewick, Sailish San Juans: Anacortes: Yakima, Kalletain, Hyak Interisland: Sealth International: Chelan
Retired: Evergreen State, Klahowya Standby: Hiyu, Tillikum
By Summer 2016 The F/V/S Triangle is broken up into 3 smaller routes: Southworth-Vashon, Southworth-Seattle, and Fauntleroy-Vashon. Samish enters service on the newly established Southworth-Seattle route. Summer 2016 vessel positioning: Point Defiance: Chetzemoka Southworth-Vashon: Hiyu Southworth-Seattle: Samish, Kitsap Fauntleroy-Vashon: Issaquah, Kittitas Bremerton: Walla Walla, Elwha Bainbridge: Wenatchee, Tacoma Kingston: Puyallup, Spokane Clinton: Tokitae, Cathlamet Port Townsend: Kennewick, Sailish San Juans: Anacortes: Kalletain, Yakima, Hyak Interisland: Sealth International: Chelan
Retired: Evergreen, Klahowya Standby: Tillikum
By Summer 2027 WSF should build 5 new vessels with an auto capacity of ~170 to replace the Supers. These vessels should more or less be lengthened versions of the Supers. Summer 2027 vessel positioning: Point Defiance: Chetzemoka Southworth-Vashon: Hiyu Southworth-Seattle: Samish, Kitsap Fauntleroy-Vashon: Issauah, Kittitas Bremerton: N~170-1, N~170-2 Bainbridge: Wenatchee, Tacoma Kingston: Puyallup, Walla Walla Clinton: Tokitae, Cathlamet Port Townsend: Kennewick, Sailish San Juans: Anacortes: N~170-3, N~170-4, N~170-5 Interisland: Sealth International: Chelan
Retired: Evergreen, Klahowya, Tillikum, Hyak, Kalletain, Yakima, Elwha Standby: Spokane
|
|
|
Post by Blue Bus Fan on Sept 29, 2013 13:03:45 GMT -8
Summer 2014 vessel positioning:
Bremerton: Walla Walla, Elwha
San Juans: Anacortes: Yakima, Kalletain, Hyak
I would switch the Elwha with another super for the Bremerton route. By Summer 2016 The F/V/S Triangle is broken up into 3 smaller routes: Southworth-Vashon, Southworth-Seattle, and Fauntleroy-Vashon. Samish enters service on the newly established Southworth-Seattle route. Summer 2016 vessel positioning: Southworth-Vashon: Hiyu Southworth-Seattle: Samish, Kitsap Fauntleroy-Vashon: Issaquah, Kittitas
Retired: Evergreen, KlahowyaI would replace the Hiyu with a 64 car ferry because I think the Hiyu would be to small for the Southworth-Vashon. I thought when WSF broke up the triangle route up it would be one ferry for Southworth-Funtleroy and two ferries for Fauntleroy-Vashon. But it would make sense to have this plan. For Seattle do you mean Colman dock? I would place Hiyu on the retired list. By Summer 2027WSF should build 5 new vessels with an auto capacity of ~170 to replace the Supers. These vessels should more or less be lengthened versions of the Supers.Summer 2027 vessel positioning:Bremerton: N~170-1, N~170-2 Kingston: Puyallup, Walla Walla San Juans: Anacortes: N~170-3, N~170-4, N~170-5
Standby: Spokane I agree with you to build five 170 car vessels instead of five more Olympic class. I would put the Spokane on the Bremerton route for peak season and keep a N-170 car vessel on standby for peak season.
|
|
|
Post by Kahloke on Sept 29, 2013 15:48:10 GMT -8
By Summer 2016
The F/V/S Triangle is broken up into 3 smaller routes: Southworth-Vashon, Southworth-Seattle, and Fauntleroy-Vashon. Samish enters service on the newly established Southworth-Seattle route. It would be nice to see the F-V-S triangle broken up at some point in the future, but it certainly won't happen by 2016; maybe by 2030, if at all. Like many others here, I would like to see MV Samish go to Anacortes. We will see what happens. It also seems likely that a 3rd Olympic Class vessel will be built, and that one could conceivably go to Bremerton.
|
|
SolDuc
Voyager
West Coast Cyclist
SolDuc and SOBC - Photo by Scott
Posts: 2,055
|
Post by SolDuc on Sept 29, 2013 16:02:38 GMT -8
By Summer 2016
The F/V/S Triangle is broken up into 3 smaller routes: Southworth-Vashon, Southworth-Seattle, and Fauntleroy-Vashon. Samish enters service on the newly established Southworth-Seattle route. It would be nice to see the F-V-S triangle broken up at some point in the future, but it certainly won't happen by 2016; maybe by 2030, if at all. Plus (but that was already covered) Seattle cannot handle another vehicle route and even after it gets rebuilt it cannot have more water coverage than it has now (that's in the project files on the DOT website). So the three routes would be F-V, F-S and V-S, but I could potentially see a Seattle-Vashon-Southworth Water Taxi in the future.
|
|
|
Post by Blue Bus Fan on Sept 29, 2013 17:00:06 GMT -8
It would be nice to see the F-V-S triangle broken up at some point in the future, but it certainly won't happen by 2016; maybe by 2030, if at all. Plus (but that was already covered) Seattle cannot handle another vehicle route and even after it gets rebuilt it cannot have more water coverage than it has now (that's in the project files on the DOT website). So the three routes would be F-V, F-S and V-S, but I could potentially see a Seattle-Vashon-Southworth Water Taxi in the future. Yeah, I could see the state asking King Co. Water Taxi to operate Seattle-Vashon-Southworth Water taxi. I think it could increase ridership and justify the 250 pax ferries that King Co. Water Taxi is building.
|
|
|
Post by Barnacle on Sept 29, 2013 17:12:43 GMT -8
By Summer 2027 WSF should build 5 new vessels with an auto capacity of ~170 to replace the Supers. These vessels should more or less be lengthened versions of the Supers. The Supers are, quite honestly, not that great of a design from an operational standpoint. The low wake profile is excellent, but they are too narrow to accommodate the cars of 1967, let alone those of today. They're top-heavy. They don't meet current construction standards. And by the time you've gotten it long enough to seat an additional 28 cars (four cars longer, seven lanes wide) you will have a seven-lane Jumbo Mark II... it'll be 462 feet long. And you can make it wider, I suppose, but then you start pushing more water... the Supers, or a revised design, essentially couldn't be built today.
|
|
|
Post by Kahloke on Sept 29, 2013 18:28:20 GMT -8
By Summer 2027 WSF should build 5 new vessels with an auto capacity of ~170 to replace the Supers. These vessels should more or less be lengthened versions of the Supers. The Supers are, quite honestly, not that great of a design from an operational standpoint. The low wake profile is excellent, but they are too narrow to accommodate the cars of 1967, let alone those of today. They're top-heavy. They don't meet current construction standards. And by the time you've gotten it long enough to seat an additional 28 cars (four cars longer, seven lanes wide) you will have a seven-lane Jumbo Mark II... it'll be 462 feet long. And you can make it wider, I suppose, but then you start pushing more water... the Supers, or a revised design, essentially couldn't be built today. How about this idea? Take the Olympic Class vessel design and lengthen it by 20 feet, so the vessel would be 382' instead of 362'. That would net you 11 additional car spaces for a total capacity of 155 cars. Yes, it's only an incremental increase, but for Flight 2 of the new-build program which will replace most of the Supers, it would get us closer to replacing the original 1960's vehicle capacity of those vessels. I'm not sure how lengthening the vessel would impact the hull design. Would it make it better or worse?
|
|
SolDuc
Voyager
West Coast Cyclist
SolDuc and SOBC - Photo by Scott
Posts: 2,055
|
Post by SolDuc on Sept 29, 2013 18:48:28 GMT -8
The Supers are, quite honestly, not that great of a design from an operational standpoint. The low wake profile is excellent, but they are too narrow to accommodate the cars of 1967, let alone those of today. They're top-heavy. They don't meet current construction standards. And by the time you've gotten it long enough to seat an additional 28 cars (four cars longer, seven lanes wide) you will have a seven-lane Jumbo Mark II... it'll be 462 feet long. And you can make it wider, I suppose, but then you start pushing more water... the Supers, or a revised design, essentially couldn't be built today. How about this idea? Take the Olympic Class vessel design and lengthen it by 20 feet, so the vessel would be 382' instead of 362'. That would net you 11 additional car spaces for a total capacity of 155 cars. Yes, it's only an incremental increase, but for Flight 2 of the new-build program which will replace most of the Supers, it would get us closer to replacing the original 1960's vehicle capacity of those vessels. I'm not sure how lengthening the vessel would impact the hull design. Would it make it better or worse? I would be more towards widening the boat by a car, which makes for an additional 17 cars to bring the total to 161 cars, one car above the original capacity of a super. That would give more wake than a super but less than a Jumbo Mark I. This would not impact on loading and unloading times since all lanes would work in pairs for the double-lane ramps at most terminals. If there is a need for more capacity than that, we could have the boats lengthened by 20 foot in order to carry 172 cars. But at that point it would be wiser just to re-use the designs of the Jumbo Mark I's rather than spend extra money to make a vessel of the same capacity.
|
|
|
Post by Barnacle on Sept 30, 2013 5:38:53 GMT -8
Actually, my math fell down. Lengthening the design of the current Super by sixty feet would provide an additional 33 cars (I wasn't thinking about the upper wings). Still, it would be the length of a Jumbo Mark I but only able to carry 177 cars. Not worth what we'd have to pay to get it. (And they STILL wouldn't be wide enough.) SolDuc, I'm assuming you meant to re-use the design of the Jumbo Mark II's, since we already re-used the design of the Jumbo Mark I's. Lengthening the hull design tends to increase speed, but I'm not sure how it would affect wake completely. I'd like to see what the Olympics push around in terms of water before designs get revisited.
|
|
|
Post by EGfleet on Sept 30, 2013 6:19:02 GMT -8
By Summer 2027 WSF should build 5 new vessels with an auto capacity of ~170 to replace the Supers. These vessels should more or less be lengthened versions of the Supers.
You know what is funny is, the state tried that back in 1969-70. They knew they were going to need boats bigger than the Supers, and called up Nickum to come up with a new boat. Guess what he did? He drew up basically an expanded Super Class. The person at WSF I spoke to about this, who has seen the plans described the vessel as kind of scary, looking even more top-heavy than the current Supers--so it isn't terribly surprising that WSF rejected the design and went with Spaulding, who gave us the Jumbos. You have to figure if they rejected the idea of an expanded Super class over forty years ago they wouldn't be terribly keen on trying it now--particularly after forty six years of knowing exactly what the limitations of those vessels are, which haven't exactly improved with age.
|
|
|
Post by Kahloke on Sept 30, 2013 10:28:46 GMT -8
By Summer 2027 WSF should build 5 new vessels with an auto capacity of ~170 to replace the Supers. These vessels should more or less be lengthened versions of the Supers.
You have to figure if they rejected the idea of an expanded Super class over forty years ago they wouldn't be terribly keen on trying it now--particularly after forty six years of knowing exactly what the limitations of those vessels are, which haven't exactly improved with age. I think WSFAN/BCFAN is the only one who has broached the idea of revisiting the Super Class design and lengthening it. Perhaps he was speaking more generally, in terms of a vessel that would carry more vehicles than the Supers, not necessarily replicating that design - not sure. What I am proposing is to take the new Olympic Class design and lengthen it by 20 feet to increase vehicle capacity by 11 cars for a total capacity of 155. Yes, others have mentioned that widening the Olympic Class vessel will gain you additional car spaces versus just lengthening it, but the new boats, Tokitae, and Samish, seem a little short to me from a visual perspective, given how much superstructure they have above the hull. It seems like the vessel would push a lot more water with a widening of the hull as Barnacle eluded to in an earlier post. I'm not sure the hull would be terribly efficient without also lengthening the vessel a considerable amount. But, I'm not a naval architect or engineer, so I really do not know. A 20 foot lengthening while maintaining the current beam would make the Olympic Class vessel better proportioned from a design standpoint, at least in my eyes. And, as Barnacle said in his last post, lengthening the hull design tends to increase speed. I'm not sure what it would do to efficiency, but visually, I think the vessel would look better if it were just a bit longer. My 2 cents. And, yes, we are getting ahead of ourselves here. Tokitae and Samish haven't even hit the water yet. We'll know a lot more about the Olympic Class design once they've been tested and in service for awhile.
|
|
|
Post by Cascadian Transport on Sept 30, 2013 15:01:32 GMT -8
I think WSFAN/BCFAN is the only one who has broached the idea of revisiting the Super Class design and lengthening it. Perhaps he was speaking more generally, in terms of a vessel that would carry more vehicles than the Supers, not necessarily replicating that design - not sure. Yes, that is it exactly. What is actually coming to mind now is the design of an Olympic, with a fourth lane in the center and lengthened a bit, with an upper passenger cabin level, like on the Supers. I just really like that upper cabin on the Supers. T hen again, that's just me.
|
|
|
Post by Barnacle on Oct 4, 2013 3:47:39 GMT -8
I think WSFAN/BCFAN is the only one who has broached the idea of revisiting the Super Class design and lengthening it. Perhaps he was speaking more generally, in terms of a vessel that would carry more vehicles than the Supers, not necessarily replicating that design - not sure. Yes, that is it exactly. What is actually coming to mind now is the design of an Olympic, with a fourth lane in the center and lengthened a bit, with an upper passenger cabin level, like on the Supers. I just really like that upper cabin on the Supers. T hen again, that's just me. A fourth lane's worth of beam would be about what it would take to sort out the stability issues... just sayin' that once you've added a fourth lane to a Super design, you more or less have a short Jumbo, that's all.
|
|
|
Post by Blue Bus Fan on Oct 4, 2013 17:28:31 GMT -8
I have a crazy idea that may or not work. Build four more boats like the Jumbo Class (in size) to replace the Super class? But with design that will not be top-heavy; but good in wake.
|
|
|
Post by Barnacle on Oct 5, 2013 3:41:47 GMT -8
I have a crazy idea that may or not work. Build four more boats like the Jumbo Class (in size) to replace the Super class? But with design that will not be top-heavy; but good in wake. Actually, from what I recall, the Jumbos are fairly wake-intensive. Not as bad as the Issaquahs, but...
|
|
mrdot
Voyager
Mr. DOT
Posts: 1,252
|
Post by mrdot on Oct 5, 2013 13:36:47 GMT -8
I have a crazy idea that may or not work. Build four more boats like the Jumbo Class (in size) to replace the Super class? But with design that will not be top-heavy; but good in wake. Actually, from what I recall, the Jumbos are fairly wake-intensive. Not as bad as the Issaquahs, but...
|
|
|
Post by Cascadian Transport on Oct 5, 2013 20:55:03 GMT -8
Hmm... I actually have some more ideas.
By Summer 2014 The new Tokitae should be in service. Super and Jumbo at Bremerton. WSF should begin re-engineing the KdT's. One per year during the Off-season. Summer 2014 Vessel Positioning Point Defiance: Chetzemoka Vashon Island: Issaquah, Kitsap, Sealth Bremerton: Walla walla, Kalletain Bainbridge: Wenatchee, Tacoma Kingston: Puyallup, Spokane Clinton: Tokitae, Kittitas Port Townsend: Kennewick, Sailish San Juans: Anacortes: Yakima, Elwha, Hyak Interisland: Tillikum International: Chelan
Standby: Cathlamet, Evergreen State Retired: Klahowya, Hiyu
By Summer 2016 Samish enters service. She is sent to the San Juans, replacing Elwha, which would go to Vashon Island, replacing Sealth, which would go to the San Juans, replacing Tillikum, which would go to into Standby. Evergreen State retired. Also, a tie-up slip is built at Clinton. 3-vessel service in ensued at Clinton. Summer 2016 Vessel Positioning Point Defiance: Chetzemoka Vashon Island: Elwha, Issaquah, Kitsap Bremerton: Walla walla, Kalletain Bainbridge: Wenatchee, Tacoma Kingston: Puyallup, Spokane Clinton: Tokitae, Kittitas, Cathlamet Port Townsend: Kennewick, Sailish San Juans: Anacortes: Samish, Yakima, Hyak Interisland: Sealth International: Chelan
Standby: Tillikum Retired: Klahowya, Hiyu, Evergreen State
By Summer 2026 Four new vessels with auto capacity of ~170 are built to replace the Supers. These boats are based off of the design of the Jumbos, with an upper passenger passenger cabin. Summer 2026 Vessel Positioning
Point Defiance: Chetzemoka Vashon Island: Samish, Issaquah, Kitsap Bremerton: Walla walla, N~170-4 Bainbridge: Wenatchee, Tacoma Kingston: Puyallup, Spokane Clinton: Tokitae, Cathlamet, Kittitas Port Townsend: Kennewick, Sailish San Juans: Anacortes: N~170-1, N~170-2, N~170-3 Interisland: Sealth International: Chelan
Standby: Yakima Retired: Hyak, Elwha, Kalletain, Tillikum, Klahowya, Evergreen State, Hiyu By Summer 2032 The Jumbos are replaced by vessels with an auto capacity of approximately 210 cars. These vessels are based completely off the design of the JMII's, with an upper passenger cabin, for passenger capacity of ~3500. Summer 2032 Vessel Positioning
Point Defiance: Chetzemoka Vashon Island: Samish, Issaquah, Kitsap Bremerton: Wenatchee, N~170-1 Bainbridge: N~210-1, N~210-2 Kingston: N~210-3, Puyallup Clinton: Tokitae, Cathlamet, Kittitas Port Townsend: Kennewick, Sailish San Juans: Anacortes: N~170-1, N~170-2, N~170-3 Interisland: Sealth International: Chelan
Standby: Tacoma Retired: Elwha, Yakima, Kalletain, Hyak, Spokane, Walla walla, Klahowya, Tillikum, Evergreen State, Hiyu
By Summer 2040 New vessels, based on the Design of the Olympics, with Auto capacity of ~140, are built to replace the Issaquahs Summer 2040 vessel positioning
Point Defiance: Chetzemoka Vashon Island: N~140-1, N~140-2, Samish Bremerton: Wenatchee, N~170-4 Bainbridge: N~210-1, N~170-2 Kingston: N~210-1, Puyallup Clinton: Tokitae, N~140-3, N~140-4 Port Townsend: Kennewick, Sailish San Juans: Anacortes: N~170-1, N~170-2, N~170-3 Interisland: N~140-5 International: N~140-6
Standby: Tacoma Retired: Issaquah, Kittitas, Kitsap, Cathlamet, Chelan, Sealth, Elwha, Yakima, Kalletain, Hyak, Hiyu, Spokane, Walla walla, Klahowya, Tillikum, Evergreen State
By Summer 2046 The Jumbo MKII class is replaced with vessels based on the N~210'S. Auto capacity: ~220 Summer 2046 vessel positioning
Point Defiance: Chetzemoka Vashon Island: N~140-1, N~140-2, Samish Bremerton: N~210-2, N~170-4 Bainbridge: N~220-1, N~220-2 Kingston: N~220-3, N~210-3 Clinton: Tokitae, N~140-3, N~140-4 Port Townsend: Kennewick, Sailish San Juans: Anacortes: N~170-1, N~170-2, N~170-3 Interisland: N~140-5 International: N~140-6
Standby: N~210-1 Retired: Tacoma, Wenatchee, Puyallup, Issaquah, Kittitas, Kitsap, Cathlamet, Chelan, Sealth, Elwha, Yakima, Kalletain, Hyak, Hiyu, Spokane, Walla walla, Klahowya, Tillikum, Evergreen State
|
|
|
Post by Blue Bus Fan on Oct 5, 2013 21:04:41 GMT -8
Hmm... I actually have some more ideas. By Summer 2014
The new Tokitae should be in service. Super and Jumbo at Bremerton. WSF should begin re-engineing the KdT's. One per year during the Off-season. Yeah I agree with you about KdT being rebuild. Hmm... I actually have some more ideas. By Summer 2016. Also, a tie-up slip is built at Clinton. 3-vessel service in ensued at Clinton. Clinton: Tokitae, Kittitas, Cathlamet I do not think that makes sense in costs and for the time that ship sails.
|
|