SolDuc
Voyager
West Coast Cyclist
SolDuc and SOBC - Photo by Scott
Posts: 2,055
|
Post by SolDuc on Oct 5, 2013 21:42:02 GMT -8
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. Yes, that's what needs to happen. Along with the Mukilteo rebuild that would be awesome 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. Now, let's actually be realistic: We assume the Samish goes to San Juans, and that's where it belongs. But the Elwha at Vashon? No. The narrow lanes would just make keeping the schedule an impossible task. I'd rather see the Elwha go back to the summer international and the Chelan go down to Vashon. 3-boat service at Clinton? Not impossible but remember that when that last happened the capacities of the boats were half what they are now, which makes them way faster to load. With Issaquahs/Olympics it'd be impossible to even have a written schedule. I'd rather see a third Olympic built to serve at Clinton as well as to replace the Tillikum. A place where a third ferry would be good, and would be able to be in service without any major impacts would be Edmonds-Kingston. 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. Yes, but instead of using a new design why not just reuse the Jumbo design? I understand that you love the upper gallery decks but the Jumbos have more than enough passenger space for any route (except Sea-Bi, of course). Plus the Jumbos are really handsome Spaulding-designed vessels. The best in the fleet if you asked me. 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. Yes. In order to reach a 3500 pax capacity you'd need to lengthen the boats about 40' (two cars). That would make a LOT more passenger space while still increasing vehicle capacity by 24 cars to 226 cars. Also I wonder why you wanted to replace the two Jumbos by three ferries? Perhaps to officialy replace the Hiyu? I totally agree with that decision but I'm wondering why you made it. And btw its Kaleetan not Kalletain. You never know what that might mean in Chinook Jargon
|
|
|
Post by Cascadian Transport on Oct 6, 2013 7:57:19 GMT -8
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. Now, let's actually be realistic: We assume the Samish goes to San Juans, and that's where it belongs. But the Elwha at Vashon? No. The narrow lanes would just make keeping the schedule an impossible task. I'd rather see the Elwha go back to the summer international and the Chelan go down to Vashon. 3-boat service at Clinton? Not impossible but remember that when that last happened the capacities of the boats were half what they are now, which makes them way faster to load. With Issaquahs/Olympics it'd be impossible to even have a written schedule. I'd rather see a third Olympic built to serve at Clinton as well as to replace the Tillikum. A place where a third ferry would be good, and would be able to be in service without any major impacts would be Edmonds-Kingston. My Logic here: With a 144-car ferry and 2 124-car boats, instead of the current situation of a 124, a 90, and an 87, we could afford to rewrite the schedule to accommodate the Elwha's longer loading time by deleting a few sailings during non-peak hours. With Overhead Loading grafted at Clinton and the new Muckelteo terminal, I think boats could be in and out in ten minutes. In that case, you would have three sailings per hour during Peak travel times. Now, instead of waiting 90 minutes at the terminal, you could wait only 60 or less. My Logic here: It would replace the Yakima, which is the only Super that I haven't retired by 2026, but rather put in Standby. It would allow the Tacoma to go into Standby, Fully replacing the Super Class.
|
|
SolDuc
Voyager
West Coast Cyclist
SolDuc and SOBC - Photo by Scott
Posts: 2,055
|
Post by SolDuc on Oct 6, 2013 9:01:23 GMT -8
My Logic here: With a 144-car ferry and 2 124-car boats, instead of the current situation of a 124, a 90, and an 87, we could afford to rewrite the schedule to accommodate the Elwha's longer loading time by deleting a few sailings during non-peak hours. With Overhead Loading grafted at Clinton and the new Muckelteo terminal, I think boats could be in and out in ten minutes. In that case, you would have three sailings per hour during Peak travel times. Now, instead of waiting 90 minutes at the terminal, you could wait only 60 or less. The F-V-S schedule is getting rewritten next year when an Issaquah will come down from Mukilteo when displaced by the Tokitae. And then probably when the Kitsap finally gets assigned there when they eventually realize its not a good fit at Bremerton. And with the Elwha the loading times that I'm talking about are 20-25 minutes with the narrow lanes. For the Mukilteo situation you also forget that with the terminal rebuild they can actually get the boats full. So an Olympic would carry something like 30-35 more cars than the Issaquahs do on runs from Mukilteo to Clinton. That eliminates quite a bit of wait if 70 more cars can go each hour. Also, like I said in my original post, Ed-Ki is where 3-vessel service must be (and it can be without major impacts with the third slip already built at Kingston and longer sailing times as well as overhead loading already there). This route sees 2-3 hour waits on weekends on a regular basis. Imagine what it would be with a third ferry operating everyday in the summer and on Fridays, Saturday and Sundays in the Fall and Spring. Also, the way ridership is growing right now is in footies. So not only car capacity of the vessels must be taken in count but also the passenger capcity. Many terminals will have a growing need for overhead loading in the near future, like Mukilteo, Clinton, Fauntleroy and even Vashon. Maybe the demand may even grow to a point when we'd need boats with two full-width and full-length passenger cabins and a sun deck on top. You never know... Oh, and its also Mukilteo not Muckelteo.
|
|
|
Post by Blue Bus Fan on Oct 6, 2013 9:26:23 GMT -8
My Logic here: With a 144-car ferry and 2 124-car boats, instead of the current situation of a 124, a 90, and an 87, we could afford to rewrite the schedule to accommodate the Elwha's longer loading time by deleting a few sailings during non-peak hours. With Overhead Loading grafted at Clinton and the new Muckelteo terminal, I think boats could be in and out in ten minutes. In that case, you would have three sailings per hour during Peak travel times. Now, instead of waiting 90 minutes at the terminal, you could wait only 60 or less. For the Mukilteo situation you also forget that with the terminal rebuild they can actually get the boats full. So an Olympic would carry something like 30-35 more cars than the Issaquahs do on runs from Mukilteo to Clinton. That eliminates quite a bit of wait if 70 more cars can go each hour. Also, like I said in my original post, Ed-Ki is where 3-vessel service must be (and it can be without major impacts with the third slip already built at Kingston and longer sailing times as well as overhead loading already there). This route sees 2-3 hour waits on weekends on a regular basis. Imagine what it would be with a third ferry operating everyday in the summer and on Fridays, Saturday and Sundays in the Fall and Spring. I agree with you. How big would the third vessel be 124, 144 or 188? Why did the state not build four of Jumbo II class? Two for Bainbridge route and two for the Edmonds route. My Logic here: With a 144-car ferry and 2 124-car boats, instead of the current situation of a 124, a 90, and an 87, we could afford to rewrite the schedule to accommodate the Elwha's longer loading time by deleting a few sailings during non-peak hours. With Overhead Loading grafted at Clinton and the new Muckelteo terminal, I think boats could be in and out in ten minutes. In that case, you would have three sailings per hour during Peak travel times. Now, instead of waiting 90 minutes at the terminal, you could wait only 60 or less. Also, the way ridership is growing right now is in footies. So not only car capacity of the vessels must be taken in count but also the passenger capcity. Many terminals will have a growing need for overhead loading in the near future, like Mukilteo, Clinton, Fauntleroy and even Vashon. Maybe the demand may even grow to a point when we'd need boats with two full-width and full-length passenger cabins and a sun deck on top. You never know... Yep that is total agree. I could see Southworth getting overhead walkway if Fauntleroy and Vashon get an overhead. I would even put an overhead at Friday Harbour and Ocras Island to improve loading time on the two Islands.
|
|
|
Post by Political Incorrectness on Oct 6, 2013 13:04:29 GMT -8
, Ed-Ki is where 3-vessel service must be (and it can be without major impacts with the third slip already built at Kingston and longer sailing times as well as overhead loading already there). This route sees 2-3 hour waits on weekends on a regular basis. Imagine what it would be with a third ferry operating everyday in the summer and on Fridays, Saturday and Sundays in the Fall and Spring. While this is true, the point of only keeping two vessels is that the boats are filled throughout the day. If you only have a wait going one direction, the issue I would be concerned with is having an unfilled boat going the other direction. While this may help with potentially increasing the tourism market, there is also underutilized capacity down on Seattle-Bremerton. There is also the spill over from Bainbridge traffic and I think many forget that the time they are waiting, they could probably be to the Hood Canal Bridge faster via Bremerton than Bainbridge.
|
|
SolDuc
Voyager
West Coast Cyclist
SolDuc and SOBC - Photo by Scott
Posts: 2,055
|
Post by SolDuc on Oct 6, 2013 13:15:25 GMT -8
, Ed-Ki is where 3-vessel service must be (and it can be without major impacts with the third slip already built at Kingston and longer sailing times as well as overhead loading already there). This route sees 2-3 hour waits on weekends on a regular basis. Imagine what it would be with a third ferry operating everyday in the summer and on Fridays, Saturday and Sundays in the Fall and Spring. While this is true, the point of only keeping two vessels is that the boats are filled throughout the day. If you only have a wait going one direction, the issue I would be concerned with is having an unfilled boat going the other direction. While this may help with potentially increasing the tourism market, there is also underutilized capacity down on Seattle-Bremerton. There is also the spill over from Bainbridge traffic and I think many forget that the time they are waiting, they could probably be to the Hood Canal Bridge faster via Bremerton than Bainbridge. Yes, most run from the other side wouldn't be full but it would still help since there can be waits at Kingston on Friday afternoons and same at Bainbridge. But if that ever goes on effect it would be illogical to deadhead in the non-peak direction. Let's not be like KCM which runs 212 from Seattle to Eastgate in the afternoons and then the buses deadhead back to Seattle when there's 50 people waiting for the 554 for Seattle. And for the Bremerton technique, that's what we do everytime we go over on the peninsula (including at Memorial day when the Walla Walla gets full, but you know how that goes ). I'd much rather spend 25 extra minutes on the ferry rather than an hour waiting at Seattle.
|
|
|
Post by chokai on Oct 6, 2013 15:45:35 GMT -8
Yep that is total agree. I could see Southworth getting overhead walkway if Fauntleroy and Vashon get an overhead. I would even put an overhead at Friday Harbour and Ocras Island to improve loading time on the two Islands. It is highly unlikely the Fauntleroy terminal will ever get overhead loading or be otherwise expanded. To give you an idea of the level of resistance in the late 90's the city council actually voted to prohibit the state from expanding the terminal. While politically things have changed a little bit in the last decade + there is significant resistance as the terminal is in the middle of a residential area, and one which has significant political clout. (i.e lots of rich people who want to preserve their views) That's one of the reasons that WSF has talked about breaking up the Triangle route several times with direct service to downtown.
|
|
|
Post by Kahloke on Oct 7, 2013 7:18:51 GMT -8
I would even put an overhead at Friday Harbour and Ocras Island to improve loading time on the two Islands. A case could probably be made to add overhead passenger loading at Friday Harbor (btw - there's no "u" in Friday Harbor), but I don't see it ever coming to fruition given the current economic crisis the ferry system is in, and probably will be for the foreseeable future. As for overhead loading at Orcas, I think I can safely say that it will never happen. It is simply not needed there. I don't know what foot passenger yields are at Orcas, but I don't think it is nearly as much as what Friday Harbor gets, even after factoring Camp Orkila loads into the equation. When it comes to adding overhead loading at terminals, I think Mukilteo and Clinton should be at the top of that list.
|
|
|
Post by Barnacle on Oct 7, 2013 16:31:27 GMT -8
I would even put an overhead at Friday Harbour and Ocras Island to improve loading time on the two Islands. A case could probably be made to add overhead passenger loading at Friday Harbor (btw - there's no "u" in Friday Harbor), but I don't see it ever coming to fruition given the current economic crisis the ferry system is in, and probably will be for the foreseeable future. As for overhead loading at Orcas, I think I can safely say that it will never happen. It is simply not needed there. I don't know what foot passenger yields are at Orcas, but I don't think it is nearly as much as what Friday Harbor gets, even after factoring Camp Orkila loads into the equation. When it comes to adding overhead loading at terminals, I think Mukilteo and Clinton should be at the top of that list. Cheese, the Winslow (very well, if you must, Bainbridge) overhead walkway at Colman Dock sees the population of San Juan Island (home to Friday Harbor) cross it every day. It takes less than that for the population of Orcas. There are many better things to spend the money on. Trust me.
|
|
|
Post by Blue Bus Fan on Oct 7, 2013 20:56:16 GMT -8
When it comes to adding overhead loading at terminals, I think Mukilteo and Clinton should be at the top of that list. I total agree with Kahloke. The terminals would be like every other major terminal and it would decrease the loading times on the route. I think the Olympic class could keep the current schedule if they put the overhead walkways at both terminals.
|
|
|
Post by compdude787 on Oct 7, 2013 21:12:57 GMT -8
A case could probably be made to add overhead passenger loading at Friday Harbor (btw - there's no "u" in Friday Harbor), but I don't see it ever coming to fruition given the current economic crisis the ferry system is in, and probably will be for the foreseeable future. As for overhead loading at Orcas, I think I can safely say that it will never happen. It is simply not needed there. I don't know what foot passenger yields are at Orcas, but I don't think it is nearly as much as what Friday Harbor gets, even after factoring Camp Orkila loads into the equation. When it comes to adding overhead loading at terminals, I think Mukilteo and Clinton should be at the top of that list. Cheese, the Winslow (very well, if you must, Bainbridge) overhead walkway at Colman Dock sees the population of San Juan Island (home to Friday Harbor) cross it every day. It takes less than that for the population of Orcas. There are many better things to spend the money on. Trust me. Totally agree with you. The only place in the San Juans that needs overhead loading is Anacortes, and it already exists there. Orcas definitely does NOT need overhead passenger ramps. Lopez and Shaw absolutely, positively, completely, do not need overhead passenger loading. In fact the Lopez ferry terminal is miles away from "Downtown Lopez" (aka Lopez Village). You have to have a car or a bike to quickly get to Lopez Village from the ferry terminal.
|
|
FNS
Voyager
The Empire Builder train of yesteryear in HO scale
Posts: 4,948
|
Post by FNS on Oct 8, 2013 1:32:09 GMT -8
Yep that is total agree. I could see Southworth getting overhead walkway if Fauntleroy and Vashon get an overhead. I would even put an overhead at Friday Harbour and Ocras Island to improve loading time on the two Islands. It is highly unlikely the Fauntleroy terminal will ever get overhead loading or be otherwise expanded. To give you an idea of the level of resistance in the late 90's the city council actually voted to prohibit the state from expanding the terminal. While politically things have changed a little bit in the last decade + there is significant resistance as the terminal is in the middle of a residential area, and one which has significant political clout. (i.e lots of rich people who want to preserve their views) That's one of the reasons that WSF has talked about breaking up the Triangle route several times with direct service to downtown. WSF has done this a couple of times. They closed FAU for refits and ran trips to Colman Dock. If you look at the "WSF Detour Photos" section, WSF broke up the tri-terminal service and ran express service to the two destinations and had the RHODY do the trips between SOU and NVI. That was 20 years ago. KALEETAN and ISSAQUAH on the SEA-NVI run, KLAHOWYA and QUINAULT on the SEA-SOU run. After the ISSAQUAH bashed FAU on her first birthday on December 29, 1980, WSF tried to split up the routes on the detour to SEA and ran the KULSHAN on the NVI-SOU run. But, the KULSHAN heard LOF-SPT (Hood Canal Bridge sinking detour) calling and the split was short-lived. If they do split up the tri-terminal service and send the ferries to SEA, at least two of the I-Class ferries could be lengthened to about 355 or 382 feet to carry more cars on the run from SEA to NVI. A standard I-Class could run from SEA to SOU. The HIYU could do the shuttle between NVI and SOU. A lot of thinking has to be done if this service is split up as well as any expansion of Colman Dock needed to handle another run on a permanent basis. Then, what do you do with the current PassCat service run by KCM?
|
|
|
Post by Kahloke on Oct 8, 2013 4:54:16 GMT -8
If they do split up the tri-terminal service and send the ferries to SEA, at least two of the I-Class ferries could be lengthened to about 355 or 382 feet to carry more cars on the run from SEA to NVI. A standard I-Class could run from SEA to SOU. The HIYU could do the shuttle between NVI and SOU. A lot of thinking has to be done if this service is split up as well as any expansion of Colman Dock needed to handle another run on a permanent basis. Then, what do you do with the current PassCat service run by KCM? The long range plan at one time had the split-up going a little differently that what you are proposing. It included the direct Seattle-Southworth route as you have suggested, but it kept Fauntleroy for the Fauntleroy-Vashon route; then, yes, a shuttle between Vashon and Southworth. In that scenario, you could still keep the King County Passenger-only service between Seattle and Vashon. After several Olympic-Class vessels get built and deployed to various runs like SEA-BRE, MUK-CLI, and ANA-SJI, the Vashon and Southworth routes could be served by the existing Issaquah-Class vessels. I do not think the triangle-route breakup will happen in time to use Hiyu as the Vashon-Southworth shuttle, meaning she will be retired before this happens, so a new vessel would have to be built for that tiny route; perhaps a 50-car STII design would suffice. I do believe it will be decades before we see the triangle-route broken up, but you never know.
|
|
|
Post by Barnacle on Oct 8, 2013 8:42:28 GMT -8
If they do split up the tri-terminal service and send the ferries to SEA, at least two of the I-Class ferries could be lengthened to about 355 or 382 feet to carry more cars on the run from SEA to NVI. A standard I-Class could run from SEA to SOU. The HIYU could do the shuttle between NVI and SOU. A lot of thinking has to be done if this service is split up as well as any expansion of Colman Dock needed to handle another run on a permanent basis. Then, what do you do with the current PassCat service run by KCM? The long range plan at one time had the split-up going a little differently that what you are proposing. It included the direct Seattle-Southworth route as you have suggested, but it kept Fauntleroy for the Fauntleroy-Vashon route; then, yes, a shuttle between Vashon and Southworth. In that scenario, you could still keep the King County Passenger-only service between Seattle and Vashon. After several Olympic-Class vessels get built and deployed to various runs like SEA-BRE, MUK-CLI, and ANA-SJI, the Vashon and Southworth routes could be served by the existing Issaquah-Class vessels. I do not think the triangle-route breakup will happen in time to use Hiyu as the Vashon-Southworth shuttle, meaning she will be retired before this happens, so a new vessel would have to be built for that tiny route; perhaps a 50-car STII design would suffice. I do believe it will be decades before we see the triangle-route broken up, but you never know. WSF hasn't ever engaged in any serious enlargement of vessels once they're off the keel blocks, that I know of. A short bit of sponsoning on the Steel-Electrics, but that's about the extent of it. I believe the HIYU was considered for Southworth-N. Vashon shuttle service some time ago (prior to I-695) and it (as well as the RHODODENDRON) was deemed insufficient. Perhaps a KdT would be useful for this. I'm interested in seeing what happens to the traffic flow at Fauntleroy once the second 124 turns up on a regular basis. An additional 35 cars westbound (and off of Fauntleroy Way) each sailing might well compensate for the 35 extra cars coming off the boat and into West Seattle. I still don't quite understand the mentality that refuses to allow expansion of the dock at Fauntleroy... after all, failure to expand won't/hasn't made the traffic go away; adding three lanes of parking on the dock would at least get some/most of the backup off of Fauntleroy Way.
|
|
|
Post by Blue Bus Fan on Oct 20, 2013 14:04:26 GMT -8
I have a solution to solve the wait time on Edmonds-Kingston route. The state should build a fourth Jumbo Mark II class for the Edmonds-Kingston route and operate the Spokane on the Bremerton route all year. The Walla Walla will operate as spare during the Fall, Winter, Spring and during the Summer in the San Juan Islands.
|
|
FNS
Voyager
The Empire Builder train of yesteryear in HO scale
Posts: 4,948
|
Post by FNS on Oct 20, 2013 14:26:18 GMT -8
I have a solution to solve the wait time on Edmonds-Kingston route. The state should build a fourth Jumbo Mark II class for the Edmonds-Kingston route and operate the Spokane on the Bremerton route all year. The Walla Walla will operate as spare during the Fall, Winter, Spring and during the Summer in the San Juan Islands. It would have been nice if a fourth JM2 would have been built. The BIG W received some wake complaints from the islanders (based on whatever notes I've read) during her inaugural summer assignment in the San Juans in 1973. I did see her doing an eastbound trip from the westbound EVERGREEN STATE on my way to Camp Orkila on Orcas Island that summer. I don't think you'll see anything bigger than a Super in the San Juans again. STCDTCIMBYWSF. Wishful thinking from a fellow who loves burgers with some awesome cheese and all the toppings!
|
|
|
Post by BreannaF on Oct 22, 2013 21:56:09 GMT -8
I have a solution to solve the wait time on Edmonds-Kingston route. The state should build a fourth Jumbo Mark II class for the Edmonds-Kingston route and operate the Spokane on the Bremerton route all year. The Walla Walla will operate as spare during the Fall, Winter, Spring and during the Summer in the San Juan Islands. "Solve" is a pretty strong word there. I'm not so sure that adding a capacity of 14 or so additional cars is going to make a huge difference on Friday afternoon here in Edmonds. (Other than to the next 14 people in line!) I am all for building additional ferries and doing more maintenance on our roads and bridges. Bring it on! And I would be willing to pay more gas tax or start paying the huge car tab tax again, if it were going to be used to pay for it. Unfortunately, too many of my neighbors are not like-minded, so the funding to do that is just not available. Actually, even though the State Legislature has "finished" their session for the year, they are going to be called back in a few weeks because they couldn't agree to a transportation budget for the next two years. So the likelihood of getting such a boat soon are pretty slim.
|
|
|
Post by Barnacle on Oct 23, 2013 8:24:48 GMT -8
I have a solution to solve the wait time on Edmonds-Kingston route. The state should build a fourth Jumbo Mark II class for the Edmonds-Kingston route and operate the Spokane on the Bremerton route all year. The Walla Walla will operate as spare during the Fall, Winter, Spring and during the Summer in the San Juan Islands. It would have been nice if a fourth JM2 would have been built. The BIG W received some wake complaints from the islanders (based on whatever notes I've read) during her inaugural summer assignment in the San Juans in 1973. I did see her doing an eastbound trip from the westbound EVERGREEN STATE on my way to Camp Orkila on Orcas Island that summer. I don't think you'll see anything bigger than a Super in the San Juans again. It's funny how, with the apparent lack of institutional memory at WSF, somehow the Walla Walla's wake in the islands manages to get preserved. It must've been a really big deal. As for the fourth Mark II, I'm actually rather glad that the fourth one--to be named SEQUIM--was never built. Aside from the dog of a name, WSF didn't--and, effectively, still doesn't--need a fourth JM2 as far as I can tell, even with the potential for an extra 168 cars each way each day. It's only a problem at peak times.
|
|
|
Post by Cascadian Transport on Oct 29, 2013 15:00:08 GMT -8
I have an idea for vessel positioning just this next summer/fall.
Pt. Defiance: Chetzemoka Vashon: Issaquah, Kitsap, Tillikum(Summer), Kittitas(Fall) Bremerton: Wallawalla, Elwha Winslow: Wenatchee, Tacoma Kingston: Puyallup, Spokane Clinton: Cathlamet, Kittitas(Early Summer), Tokitae(Later Summer) Port Townsend: Kennewick, Salish San Juans: Anacortes: Yakima, Kalletan, Hyak International: Chelan Interisland: Sealth
Retired/Standby: Evergreen, Klahowya Standby: Hiyu, Kittitas(Later Summer), Tillikum(Fall)
|
|
SolDuc
Voyager
West Coast Cyclist
SolDuc and SOBC - Photo by Scott
Posts: 2,055
|
Post by SolDuc on Oct 29, 2013 16:39:24 GMT -8
I have an idea for vessel positioning just this next summer/fall. Pt. Defiance: Chetzemoka Vashon: Issaquah, Kitsap, Tillikum(Summer), Kittitas(Fall) Bremerton: Wallawalla, Elwha Winslow: Wenatchee, Tacoma Kingston: Puyallup, Spokane Clinton: Cathlamet, Kittitas(Early Summer), Tokitae(Later Summer) Port Townsend: Kennewick, Salish San Juans: Anacortes: Yakima, Kalletan, Hyak International: Chelan Interisland: Sealth
Retired/Standby: Evergreen, Klahowya Standby: Hiyu, Kittitas(Later Summer), Tillikum(Fall)A few minor changes: - As weird as it might sound, the Cathlamet is going over to Vashon, not the Kittitas. WSF seems to have made up its mind about that unfortunately. - The Tokitae won't be in service until fall. We'll probably see her on docking/sea trials this summer but no active service. - Why would you retire two boats when one gets into service? - No specific ferry's going anywhere. The Elwha stays up in the islands and the Kaleetan at Bremerton. As we said before the Elwha isn't a great choice at Bremerton since she can't run at full speed in Rich Passage because of her wake. Here's what next summer would look like Anacortes/San Juans: Chelan, Elwha, Yakima, Hyak, E-State PT-Keystone: Salish, Kennewick Mukilteo-Clinton: Cathlamet, Kittitas Edmonds-Kingston: Puyallup, Spokane Seattle-Winslow: Tacoma, Wenatchee Seattle-Bremerton: Walla Walla, Kaleetan Fauntleroy-Vashon-Southworth: Issaquah, Kitsap, Klahowya Talequah-Point Defiance: Chetzemoka Standby: Sealth, Tillikum, Hiyu And Fall. Changes are in bold. Anacortes/San Juans: Elwha, Yakima, Hyak, E-State PT-Keystone: Salish, Kennewick Mukilteo-Clinton: Tokitae, Kittitas Edmonds-Kingston: Puyallup, Spokane Seattle-Winslow: Tacoma, Wenatchee Seattle-Bremerton: Walla Walla, Kaleetan Fauntleroy-Vashon-Southworth: Issaquah, Kitsap, CathlametTalequah-Point Defiance: Chetzemoka Standby/Maintenance Replacement: Chelan, Tillikum, Hiyu Retired: Klahowya (or E-State, based on WSF's decision)
|
|
|
Post by Cascadian Transport on Oct 29, 2013 18:52:41 GMT -8
A few minor changes: - As weird as it might sound, the Cathlamet is going over to Vashon, not the Kittitas. WSF seems to have made up its mind about that unfortunately. - The Tokitae won't be in service until fall. We'll probably see her on docking/sea trials this summer but no active service. - Why would you retire two boats when one gets into service? - No specific ferry's going anywhere. The Elwha stays up in the islands and the Kaleetan at Bremerton. As we said before the Elwha isn't a great choice at Bremerton since she can't run at full speed in Rich Passage because of her wake. Here's what next summer would look like Anacortes/San Juans: Chelan, Elwha, Yakima, Hyak, E-State PT-Keystone: Salish, Kennewick Mukilteo-Clinton: Cathlamet, Kittitas Edmonds-Kingston: Puyallup, Spokane Seattle-Winslow: Tacoma, Wenatchee Seattle-Bremerton: Walla Walla, Kaleetan Fauntleroy-Vashon-Southworth: Issaquah, Kitsap, Klahowya Talequah-Point Defiance: Chetzemoka Standby: Sealth, Tillikum, Hiyu And Fall. Changes are in bold. Anacortes/San Juans: Elwha, Yakima, Hyak, E-State PT-Keystone: Salish, Kennewick Mukilteo-Clinton: Tokitae, Kittitas Edmonds-Kingston: Puyallup, Spokane Seattle-Winslow: Tacoma, Wenatchee Seattle-Bremerton: Walla Walla, Kaleetan Fauntleroy-Vashon-Southworth: Issaquah, Kitsap, CathlametTalequah-Point Defiance: Chetzemoka Standby/Maintenance Replacement: Chelan, Tillikum, Hiyu Retired: Klahowya (or E-State, based on WSF's decision) My Logic: I think the Cathlamet should stay at Clinton, Simply because of her history there. If I were making the decision, Kittitas would be going to Vashon. But, that's just me. I think Elwha would work better at Bremerton than it does in the Islands for 2 reasons: 1. The Elwha is more top-heavy than the other Supers, and Bremerton has calmer water than the Islands. 2. I'm not an expert on this, but to my understanding, the ferries have a tier 1 and tier 2 capacity. Tier 1 means the vessel has enough life-rafting for everyone. Tier 2 means the vessel does not. On all the supers, max. capacity of tier 2 is 2,020 passengers&crew. However, on Hyak, Kalletain, and Yakima, max. capacity of tier 1 is only 400 passengers&crew. On the Elwha, this number is 1,020 passengers&crew. the Elwha might be able to make very busy sailings @ Bremerton without going up to tier 2.
|
|
|
Post by Kahloke on Oct 29, 2013 18:56:38 GMT -8
And Fall. Changes are in bold. Anacortes/San Juans: Elwha, Yakima, Hyak, E-State PT-Keystone: Salish, Kennewick Mukilteo-Clinton: Tokitae, Kittitas Edmonds-Kingston: Puyallup, Spokane Seattle-Winslow: Tacoma, Wenatchee Seattle-Bremerton: Walla Walla, Kaleetan Fauntleroy-Vashon-Southworth: Issaquah, Kitsap, CathlametTalequah-Point Defiance: Chetzemoka Standby/Maintenance Replacement: Chelan, Tillikum, Hiyu Retired: Klahowya (or E-State, based on WSF's decision) That's probably a pretty accurate deployment schedule, depending, of course, on which vessels will be out of service at that time. Based on what I have read regarding F-V-S, I think they will only have 2 Issaquah-124's, and 1 87-90 car vessel, either Tillikum or Sealth, depending on the maintenance schedule and vessel availability. So, based on that assumption, F-V-S will have Cathlamet, Issaquah, and Tillikum (or Sealth). I hate to say it, but it is likely that we will continue to see Kitsap at Bremerton for some time to come
|
|
SolDuc
Voyager
West Coast Cyclist
SolDuc and SOBC - Photo by Scott
Posts: 2,055
|
Post by SolDuc on Oct 29, 2013 19:06:17 GMT -8
I think Elwha would work better at Bremerton than it does in the Islands for 2 reasons: 1. The Elwha is more top-heavy than the other Supers, and Bremerton has calmer water than the Islands. 2. I'm not an expert on this, but to my understanding, the ferries have a tier 1 and tier 2 capacity. Tier 1 means the vessel has enough life-rafting for everyone. Tier 2 means the vessel does not. On all the supers, max. capacity of tier 2 is 2,020 passengers&crew. However, on Hyak, Kalletain, and Yakima, max. capacity of tier 1 is only 400 passengers&crew. On the Elwha, this number is 1,020 passengers&crew. the Elwha might be able to make very busy sailings @ Bremerton without going up to tier 2. Yes, Bremerton has somewhat calmer waters than the Islands, but as I said with the Elwha's lower freeboard (she sits lower in the water), her wake is much bigger than the one for the rest of the supers and thus it'd have to slow down in Rich Passage, loosing the advantages that the Supers had. As for tier 1/tier 2, it's not like it costs extra money to run in tier 2, unlike changing from a A-licence to a B-licence costs more in crew (that's BC Ferries, not WSF). However it matters to SOLAS, that's why her tier 1 capacity is higher. Bus as you said, the waters at Bremerton are calmer than in the SJs, thus some major incident would rater happen in the SJs, right? That's where it gets more important. Also remember that the Elwha is the only boat that can work the Sidney run in the fall in order to meet capacity demands on the rest of the domestic runs there...
|
|
SolDuc
Voyager
West Coast Cyclist
SolDuc and SOBC - Photo by Scott
Posts: 2,055
|
Post by SolDuc on Oct 29, 2013 19:12:57 GMT -8
I hate to say it, but it is likely that we will continue to see Kitsap at Bremerton for some time to come Yes, at least when the Walla Walla has to fill in. But it shouldn't be on the run when a super or the Walla Walla is on standby. Also no more Sealth on the run!
|
|
|
Post by Blue Bus Fan on Oct 29, 2013 19:18:42 GMT -8
And Fall. Changes are in bold. Anacortes/San Juans: Elwha, Yakima, Hyak, E-State PT-Keystone: Salish, Kennewick Mukilteo-Clinton: Tokitae, Kittitas Edmonds-Kingston: Puyallup, Spokane Seattle-Winslow: Tacoma, Wenatchee Seattle-Bremerton: Walla Walla, Kaleetan Fauntleroy-Vashon-Southworth: Issaquah, Kitsap, CathlametTalequah-Point Defiance: Chetzemoka Standby/Maintenance Replacement: Chelan, Tillikum, Hiyu Retired: Klahowya (or E-State, based on WSF's decision) I agree with you for all them excluding one route. I would change the Anacortes/ San Juan Island. I would go for that route: Elwha, Yakima, Hyak and Sealth. The Standby/ Maintenance Replacement: Chelan, Evergreen state, Hiyu. I like your idea for the Bremerton route, I would make the Walla Walla the second boat.
|
|