|
Post by Balfour on Sept 18, 2008 21:49:30 GMT -8
In recent years it seems to me that upgrades have revolved more around gift shop improvements than working on the machinery. I have to agree with you on that. The ferries sure look nice but they break down just as much as before.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 18, 2008 21:57:12 GMT -8
Hardy said, (In recent years it seems to me that upgrades have revolved more around gift shop improvements than working on the machinery. ) I have to agree with Hardy, I've heard stories about different BC Ferries from the shipyard workers that work on them when they are in for a refit or repair. What these skilled tradesmen see is not what the traveling public see. The Ferries could and should be maintained more than they are. I would hate to be inconvenienced by a BC Ferry that broke down in the middle of the Straight, because the proper maintenance was not done.
A few years ago, I knew that one of our friends was working on a smaller ferry in the dry dock. I asked him what was wrong with it and he replied that everything on that ferry was waring out and that they needed a new ship.
|
|
|
Post by Canucks on Sept 18, 2008 21:58:55 GMT -8
I don't understand the "make it look nice logic". Most people take the ferry to get from point A to B. They don't care about overpriced gift shops or other fancy amenities. Heck, half of the people stay in their cars! BCF should clue into this and put some more money into actually getting people to where they want to go at more then 13 kn.
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,177
|
Post by Neil on Sept 18, 2008 22:03:34 GMT -8
I would hope the BCFS is planning to get 40+ years of service out of the Spirits, as they have done with the V's. But they will not, if they do not give them the TLC that they deserve. As of the 2003 CFS Contract, the retirement dates for the Spirits was 2038/2040. With the retirement of virtually every other non-V being delayed for economy reasons, it's safe to say that they're still planning on the Spirits being around at least that long. Perhaps when the 'New Westminster gets back on line and the CC is introduced, there will be time to properly deal with the mechanical issues. Canucks- Don't underestimate the importance of onboard revenue; this is one of the areas where BC Ferries is increasing their take, and there's the potential to do better still. Not to say that mechanical maintenance should be neglected for better burgers.
|
|
|
Post by Northern Exploration on Sept 19, 2008 7:27:33 GMT -8
Without the income from the giftshops and food services, fares would be need to be higher. Faster ferries will burn more fuel and more $$$ for fares as well. So everything has a downside. But in my mind maintenance is a given and has to be kept up to date.
|
|
|
Post by chinook2 on Sept 19, 2008 14:00:32 GMT -8
I don't understand the "make it look nice logic". Most people take the ferry to get from point A to B. They don't care about overpriced gift shops or other fancy amenities. Heck, half of the people stay in their cars! BCF should clue into this and put some more money into actually getting people to where they want to go at more then 13 kn. Without catering and merchandise, many crew would be sitting collecting a paycheque, playing cards, and waiting for the boat to sink so they can man the lifeboats. Coast Guard crewing requirements. If they could sail with the same crew levels that WSF and the Coho run under, they would, and retail operations, if they existed, would likely be contracted out.
|
|
|
Post by chinook2 on Sept 19, 2008 14:25:45 GMT -8
If things really are that bad on SOBC, then it sounds like the responsible thing to do is to remove her from service and take the necessary time to fix things correctly. Once CC starts service, she could be the #1 boat of out Swartz Bay, SOVI could move to Tsawwassen and replace SOBC as the #1 boat from that side, and Saanich can continue as the #2 boat out of Swartz Bay. Route 1 will be going back to a 3-boat schedule on the 15th of October, right? That would work, unless SOBC is still out of commission for the Christmas season, in which case either Vancouver or New Westminster would have to be available for 2nd boat Tsawwassen. My feeling is the CC is a little small to be doing 1st SB on the weekdays, at least in the AM--the first couple of sailings generally fill right up even when the afternoon is slow. makes sense to me to send the first watch of the day out with SOVI, then the afternoon crew does their shift with CC. Better balance between capacity and operational savings.
|
|
|
Post by ferryking on Sept 19, 2008 14:36:43 GMT -8
My feeling is the CC is a little small to be doing 1st SB on the weekdays, at least in the AM--the first couple of sailings generally fill right up even when the afternoon is slow. makes sense to me to send the first watch of the day out with SOVI, then the afternoon crew does their shift with CC. Better balance between capacity and operational savings. I think this was discussed elsewhere but with the Coastals only being 7.5m shorter and with the hoistable ramps not being in commission (apparently)on the Spirit of BC...there capacities probably wouldn't be to different...someone was indicating that.
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on Sept 19, 2008 21:42:31 GMT -8
The Spirits have a capacity without the ramps of 410 cars versus 370 on the Coastals. I believe that many (perhaps most) route 1 users would find the Coastals to be inferior to what they are used to with the Spirits, particularly if deck 5 is closed off.
|
|
Koastal Karl
Voyager
Been on every BC Ferry now!!!!!
Posts: 7,747
|
Post by Koastal Karl on Sept 20, 2008 10:17:40 GMT -8
The Queen of Vancouver looks to be taking the place of the SOBC on and off next week. Friday the 26th and Sunday the 28th the SOBC is listed as an extra doing the Vancouver sailings and the SOBC sailings are being done by the Vancouver full time.
|
|
|
Post by gordon on Sept 20, 2008 14:14:31 GMT -8
Would it be financially viable for BCFS to keep one of the Vs & re-engine it with a more fuel efficient power plant and have it as a spare which they will obviously need at some point?
At some point in the niot to distant future they will need more capacity on the Nanaimo routes it will be interesting to see what BCFS does because it seems to me that Horseshoe bay is pretty much maxed out capacity wise at the busier times of the year.
|
|
|
Post by Kahloke on Sept 20, 2008 15:06:31 GMT -8
I've been wondering about that, myself. It seems to me it might be a bit premature to get rid of all of the V's seeing as how it leaves the ferry system without any reserve vessels in case something goes wrong, like the problems that have been plaguing SOBC of late. This will be especially problematic during the summer months when EVERY vessel will be spoken for. If they keep one V as a backup boat, that would certainly help capacity when one of the regulars is out with a problem, or even for scheduled maintenance. As it stands, if one of the Rte 1, 30, 2, or 3 boats breaks down next summer, and the V's are sold off, customers will just have to endure reduced service on whichever run is affected.
|
|
|
Post by Northern Exploration on Sept 20, 2008 15:17:30 GMT -8
Some of the $50 million plus going into the New West has to be upgrades to keep Transport Canada happy enough to extend her service life a little longer. Even assuming the extra V being kept wasn't Coastalized, I would imagine doing an engine swap would only be the beginning of the story. I don't have my BC Ferries books handy but if I recall correctly (Chris or one of the other experts will chime in I am sure) the New West had the newest and most powerful engines in her "Supersizing" so was the most suitable to keep (besides having the extra height upper car deck.) I think BC Ferries is thinking with the extra lift available with the Coastals another ferry won't be needed for a while. We will see about that. If CI isn't able to divert enough people to the Duke to Tswwassen route, then maybe she will be reassigned to HSB to DPB. However, it it works for the CI to continue to draw people to Duke that has unused capacity that will be a relief for the HSB to DPB route, keep the traffic better distributed in Nanaimo and probably ruffle the fewest feathers.
|
|
|
Post by Hardy on Sept 20, 2008 17:24:30 GMT -8
Would it be financially viable for BCFS to keep one of the Vs & re-engine it with a more fuel efficient power plant and have it as a spare which they will obviously need at some point? I believe that this is not efficient for them to do, as the power plant is only scratching the surface of the problems that the older V's have. Not only that, but all the V's have already been apparently sold, it is just a matter of the 'delivery dates' to the new owners that is still flexible -- at least according to the informnation that has come out of BCFS so far. Notwithstanding that they are already sold, I think it has been mentioned already (especially in other threads concerning the sale of the V's) that Transport Canada specs for which the current 'grandfathering' agreement ends in 2010; this would make them money-pits for which BCFS could never hope to recover the amount of money that they would have to sink into them to bring them up to the new standards, never mind re-engining them or any other upgrades. At some point in the niot to distant future they will need more capacity on the Nanaimo routes it will be interesting to see what BCFS does because it seems to me that Horseshoe bay is pretty much maxed out capacity wise at the busier times of the year. HSB and DB are both pretty well maxed, as they have been for some time. DB is getting some modifications to make the holding area somewhat bigger, but any expansion at HSB would require double-decking the holding area, an expansion that I am sure the NIMBY's will never stand for. That said, there is always 'route-diversion' which BCFS is already actively pursuing (Coast-savers on Rte-30). Another option that they could explore is to modify the schedules to perhaps allocate available resources in a more efficient manner; this is particularly true at HSB which serves 3 routes.
|
|
|
Post by Hardy on Sept 20, 2008 17:26:53 GMT -8
The Queen of Vancouver looks to be taking the place of the SOBC on and off next week. Friday the 26th and Sunday the 28th the SOBC is listed as an extra doing the Vancouver sailings and the SOBC sailings are being done by the Vancouver full time. I find this interesting; are they somehow hoping to "hot-fix" her by not removing her entirely from the rotation? I am not sure how well this will work out, but I suppose only time will tell. Heaven forbid they pull her, and send her to be repaired properly in one fell swoop -- by all means, let's continue to run her unreliably on an uncertain schedule under questionable power.
|
|
|
Post by PCL Driver on Sept 20, 2008 17:54:04 GMT -8
The Vancouver is replacing the SOBC on Sunday because of strong "convergent" tides. Seems the SOBC, with only 2 1\2 engines cannot transit Active Pass during these strong tides, and therefore must divert around East Point, adding 30 - 45 minutes to each trip.
|
|
|
Post by Dane on Sept 20, 2008 17:55:58 GMT -8
I find this interesting; are they somehow hoping to "hot-fix" her by not removing her entirely from the rotation? I am not sure how well this will work out, but I suppose only time will tell. Heaven forbid they pull her, and send her to be repaired properly in one fell swoop -- by all means, let's continue to run her unreliably on an uncertain schedule under questionable power. I follow the same thinking as you, it seems quite odd. To bad we can't seem to get the "straight goods" on what's going on? It could be anything from a minor but problematic annoyance so something much more serious as has been well outlined in this thread. While I would never disagree that an additional major vessel would be nice the current issues facing capacity on some routes could be better handled with what we've got right now. Rte 1 will see an addition of capacity with the CC going into service, and obviously Rte 30 also benefited from a fairly substantial addition to capacity. Rte 2's addition was arguably the least significant with the CR. Rte 2's schedule is silly when they are utilizing three boats, and if there was a more efficient use of the Langdale #2 vessel I also believe many of the extraordinary waits could be avoided. Frankly, Rte 2 needs three vessel service even this late into the year with a two sailing wait yesterday and one sailing waits throughout the day on Thursday. I suppose the big factor I am not considering, nor do I know the answer to is: How many people are being left behind at night? If many people are being left behind clearly more service is needed, but if the 930pm sailing isn't leaving many behind than perhaps, from BCFS's perspective, capacity is bang-on. Sometimes, like Thursday evening, I'm left shaking my head when the Queen of Oak Bay had a substantial crew on her but didn't sail as an MD to Horseshoe Bay, rather waited to tag off with the Cowichan for the 930pm out of Departure Bay. The V Class are not a realistic solution for BC Ferries' capacity woes. While they could provide a short term patch until, let's say something rational like a fourth Coastal was built, they wouldn't be viable after roughly 2012. Having benefited from reading quite a bit of material on the vessels as of late, some of which isn't widely or easily publicly accessible I feel it's fair to make an objective judgment that the vessels truly are nearing the end of their service lives (particularly the Esquimalt). We frequently seem to forget in our discussions that the V Class should have already been gone for about 8 years at this point, but previous mismanagement, lack of funds, of the failure of the Fast Ferries have just put us in a position now where their retirement is feasible. All in all, if the worse case scenario is true and the SoBC has to be removed from service for three months we certainly are approaching a time that's suitable to do it. With the Vancouver certainly plying our waterways for at least another 4 months we should capitalize on the one chance we'll have where there's an 11th major vessel.
|
|
|
Post by gordon on Sept 20, 2008 21:03:34 GMT -8
Yesterday there were 2 sailing waits on RT#2 at HSB in the afternoon & evening Was the Oak Bay still out of service after it's sewage problem earlier in the week , if not why was the Cowichan not inserted for at least 1 round trip?
|
|
|
Post by Scott (Former Account) on Sept 20, 2008 22:16:15 GMT -8
Oak Bay came back online Friday night for the 9:35 PM sailing from Departure Bay. The Cowichan was not available to be used for MD sailings...
|
|
|
Post by Hardy on Sept 21, 2008 0:03:42 GMT -8
The V Class are not a realistic solution for BC Ferries' capacity woes. All in all, if the worse case scenario is true and the SoBC has to be removed from service for three months we certainly are approaching a time that's suitable to do it. With the Vancouver certainly plying our waterways for at least another 4 months we should capitalize on the one chance we'll have where there's an 11th major vessel. Don't forget that the Vancouver is already "assigned" to be a Rte-30 replacement vessel, while the Saanich is still the 3rd boat on Rte-1. We're still a boat short! While I agree that the V's retirements are on the mark in terms of timeline, BCFS still has some serious capacity/lift issues and the "thin-ness" of their contingency plans seems to necessitate them running half-assed ships and inadequate schedules. My key point WRT the SoBC has been that they should have just pulled her when this issue FIRST surfaced and do the "couple of week" repair, rather than limping her around and doing further damage to the point where we are now looking at a multi-month, multi-million dollar repair!! It's the same as you having a strange engine noise and accompanying vibration coming from YOUR car when you accelerate, but ignoring it for 4 months before it finally pooches on you, fully loaded and on the way out of town for your cousins wedding, on the Coquihalla, with your entire family on board, in the middle of a snowstorm!
|
|
|
Post by Dane on Sept 21, 2008 0:34:00 GMT -8
... I was assuming a somewhat expedient (before 31 Nov) of the Queen of New Westminster... perhaps too optimistic on my part Although, progress is certainly being made on her at this point. In general I agree, however - realistically, though, BC Ferries will not support an additional vessel unless they absolutely have too. As soon as the CC comes online, even if the SoBC is down, I would expect top see the Saanich drop within weeks.
|
|
|
Post by Hardy on Sept 21, 2008 4:41:46 GMT -8
In general I agree, however - realistically, though, BC Ferries will not support an additional vessel unless they absolutely have too. As soon as the CC comes online, even if the SoBC is down, I would expect top see the Saanich drop within weeks. I certainly agree that BCFS will not keep the V's around simply as "spares" sitting "on the shelf in reserve". That said, if either the SoBC repair or the QoNW "rebuilding from the keel up" go astray, then there is a distinct need. Another thing to consider, and I am not sure how much this would play into it, but if the Vancouver and Saanich are sold to the same concern that bought her sister (PJ/QoE) and that sale/delivery is temporarily "stalled", would BCFS hold-back on the delivery of the QoV/QoSaa?? Having them in "ready reserve" laid up at Deas may be an option, rather than stripping them down for a journey FAR FAR in the future at an uncertain date... just my two cents. (I am not advocating KEEPING them, just not transferring them until they resolve delivery issues.)
|
|
|
Post by johnnytindale on Sept 21, 2008 10:43:53 GMT -8
With the SOBC's recent troubles, I was thinking about possible scenarios in 2009 when all the V's are sold and Rt 1 has the two Spirits, the CC, and the New Westminster. What happens if one (or more) of those vessels has to be removed from service during peak season? As it stands right now, there would be absolutely no alternative for a spare vessel to serve Rt 1, given the C's limitations re Active Pass. The only possibility would be to move one of the Coastals to Rt 1. However, at present, this would not be possible, as Tsawwassen crews would not be trained on the Coastals. In my estimation, the end result will be cancelled sailings and massive waits. Is it all realistic to modify one of the C's to efficiently navigate Active Pass? In the end, I am really believing that BCFS will regret not building a 4th Coastal. Ideally, there should be two Coastals on both Rt 1 & Rt 2.
|
|
|
Post by sunshinecoastkid on Sept 21, 2008 10:50:38 GMT -8
I agree two coastals on route 1 would be more efficient. And if the SOBC keeps on having difficulties in the future, BC Ferries is going to be sorry and alot of people are going to be mad.
|
|
|
Post by Political Incorrectness on Sept 21, 2008 11:12:37 GMT -8
Honestly, I wish they had built two cruiseship ferries for Route 1 with 550 car capacities or more. Then there would never be an overload and the Spirits could rot away . In all seriousness though, a 4th Coastal from spending wise would have been a very large bargain and would have provided another long term vessel to the fleet.
|
|