|
Post by bcfcbccsscollector on Apr 28, 2006 20:14:29 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on Apr 28, 2006 21:19:59 GMT -8
The first picture showing the ship from the front clearly shows a feature that distinguishes the 1st two of the seven sisters from the other five. That is that the middle three windows of the wheelhouse are different then the windows to either side. The same is [was] also true of the City of Victoria.
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on Mar 8, 2007 20:31:49 GMT -8
My contribution for today comes from 1981. The Queen of Vancouver had just been through the lifting process (you could call it a MLU). An 'open ferry' had just taken place on the Vancouver waterfront. The ship was now headed off to join its sister the Victoria, also newly lifted, and together resume life as the number 1 vessels on Route 1. My brother David was waiting a Prospect Point, Stanley Park, for the Vancouver to sail on by. Photo by DOT, 1981
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on Sept 28, 2007 21:11:12 GMT -8
A newly lifted Queen of Vancouver backing out of Tsawwassen Terminal - ~1981 Note - no deck 3 car deck windows... DOT photo
|
|
|
Post by Balfour on Sept 28, 2007 22:06:53 GMT -8
That one's a beauty. The fresh pastel blue paint looks very sharp!
|
|
|
Post by Queen of Nanaimo Teen on Sept 28, 2007 22:15:10 GMT -8
Yes, very good photo!! Thanks for posting it! Although, in my opinion I think there is a little bit too much blue at the front. It looks like chocolate sauce all over a little kids face! (not in a bad way though)
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on Dec 23, 2007 10:56:58 GMT -8
Swartz Bay August 1970 We have been discussing this photo with regard to which vessel is in berth 3 beside the V in berth 2 (the Sechelt Queen). I would like to draw attention to the 'V' itself. The wheelhouse windows tell me this ship can be only one of two vessels. The date shown, August 1970, tells me the vessel can only be one of those two. If so then this photo is very unique as it could only have been taken on the 1st or 2nd of August, or at the very end of that month. Question: Why do I say this?On the other hand I suspect the date is wrong and the ship is the other V with that particular wheelhouse window arrangement. The name looks to give this one away, confirming that the date is not 1970.
|
|
pscurr
Chief Steward
Posts: 204
|
Post by pscurr on Dec 23, 2007 12:19:07 GMT -8
I know it is not the Queen of Victoria on the first of August, as I was working at the Tsawwassen Terminal that weekend. The Queen of Vancouver is docked beside the Sechelt Queen, the date could be off as I was referencing the date on the negative sleeves that could be incorrect, negs may have been filed in different locations over the past 37 years. All the photos have been taken between 1969 /1972. So what is you guess of the date?
As far as the interior shot is concerned I think it is a route 1 boat prestretched perhaps the Vancouver . Thanks for the information and help.
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on Dec 23, 2007 13:19:43 GMT -8
If it is the Vancouver (that is what the name appears to be) then the photo is not from 1970, but a year or two later. In August of 1970 only two vessels had been stretched (the Esquimalt & the Victoria). The Victoria was, as we know, out of service for most of August, 1970.
|
|
pscurr
Chief Steward
Posts: 204
|
Post by pscurr on Dec 23, 2007 13:36:17 GMT -8
I would think it would be the summer of 71. When were the Vancouver and Saanich stretched?
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on Dec 23, 2007 15:24:20 GMT -8
They stretched the Esquimalt first, in 1969. The Victoria followed in 1970. For the dates of streching of the other five sisters see Peter Favelle's book, The Queens of British Columbia. It says the the Vanvouver & Saanich were 'rebuilt' (meaning stretched) in 1972. Given that, the picture above would likely be from the summer of 1972.
Favelle's book also gives the stretching dates for the B's as: 1972 - Burnaby & New West; 1974 - Nanaimo.
And in answer to Mr. Fluge... The Vancouver was indeed in service throughout August 1970, but would not yet have been stretched as in the photo above. So the ship in the above photo is the Vancouver but the date is incorrect.
|
|
pscurr
Chief Steward
Posts: 204
|
Post by pscurr on Dec 23, 2007 15:32:11 GMT -8
Ah... the years seem to run together. I very well could be the summer of '72 thanks again.
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on Dec 28, 2007 23:38:43 GMT -8
Here are three photos taken from or on board the Queen of Vancouver on 2 June 1972, just after she was stretched. I was on the ferry with the Mt. Doug High School track team en route to the BC High School's meet in Kelowna. The photos were taken in and around Active Pass while the ship was Tsawwassen bound. all photos by JST©
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on Feb 1, 2008 15:08:40 GMT -8
In honour of the impending disappearance of the V's, I am going to scan, and display here some newspaper/magazine clippings from their history. To beging with the three images below originated in a Mark Wilson article in The Province entitled Ambitious ship surgery will give two ferry Queens big lift. The date: 4 January 1981. Most of these clippings come form the DOT collection although this one is mine.
|
|
Mill Bay
Voyager
Long Suffering Bosun
Posts: 2,886
|
Post by Mill Bay on Feb 1, 2008 15:32:02 GMT -8
Neat article.
I like the way it describes the lengthening operations as carving the ships in half and then inserting a plug into them. Also it's interesting to know that QPR and the Queen of the North had the same designers. They always did seem to share a certain resemblance.
|
|
|
Post by hergfest on Feb 1, 2008 18:09:24 GMT -8
Funny to think they started with 106 car capacities.
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Feb 1, 2008 18:23:46 GMT -8
Jim: Thanks for the story re the lifting of the V's. Very interesting read.
They used a Danish marine-architect for the job. I guess that offshore-design is less a political hot-potato than offshore-build.
I still am amazed at how soon the platform-decks were added, after the original ships entered service. I suppose that the Ferry Authority really had no idea of what to expect re capacity & growth.
Something that I found funny: The explanation of why a pre-fab "plug" piece couldn't be used for the new upper-car-deck. I suppose that they didn't have Paul Bunyan to hold the sliced superstructure up & out of the way while they installed the new deck !
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on Feb 1, 2008 22:06:53 GMT -8
I don't know if it would have been possible at the time but if the passenger decks had been cut into chunks then large cranes could have lifted them out of the way allowing the same large cranes to lift prefabricated upper car deck modules into place fairly quickly.
As it was these heightening jobs were done in periods of about 5 months; a little longer for the Esq. & Saanich which also were re-engined. Compare this with the time required to do the MLU's on the 'C' class of recent years.
|
|
Quatchi
Voyager
Engineering Officer - CCG
Posts: 930
|
Post by Quatchi on Feb 2, 2008 0:18:28 GMT -8
Thats a great article. The 106 car capacity puts into perspective how small these ships originally were. They must not have been much bigger than the Tsawwassen and Sydney. It is truly amazing how versatile the design of these ships was. I don't think there are too many ships out there that could stand what the V's have gone through. It is amazing that they doubled their capacity and only lost a knot of the top end. Pop question: Does anyone know what is below the waterline in the piece they added during the stretch? Crew only bar maybe . Seems like "found" space as we call it in the architecture business. Kinda like the space under a staircase, what ya gonna put in there. Obviously the ship didn't need it as it was already fully functional. Cheers,
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on Feb 2, 2008 9:54:56 GMT -8
The 106 car capacity puts into perspective how small these ships originally were. They must not have been much bigger than the Tsawwassen and Sydney. As built the Seven Sisters were only marginally larger than the Sidney/ Tsawwassen. Their auto capacities were virtually identical. One important difference, however, was that the newer vessels were beamier. They also had significantly larger passenger spaces. We all know today that the Tsawwassen functionally has three car lanes on each side. To try and get four in involves shoe horning and a good mix of Smart cars and Honda Fits. The Seven Sisters have 80 cm of extra width to play with meaning the each lane is a little wider. Apparently, this and other differences are what made it possible to modify the Seven Sisters first with the lengthening, and later the adding the second car deck.
|
|
pscurr
Chief Steward
Posts: 204
|
Post by pscurr on Feb 22, 2008 17:39:40 GMT -8
Good Afternoon, It is time for another round of name that ferry and location. to the forum coordinators, thanks for all your attention to the detail, this is a great site...
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on Feb 22, 2008 18:22:22 GMT -8
This view is in Active Pass. The time - 1962-71. Galiano is on the left, Mayne on the right. The ferry is an unstretched V rather than a B. The funnel gives that away. It is en route from Tsawwassen to Swartz Bay, and about to pass Miners Bay, which is just out of the photo on the right.
The guy standing in the boat in the foreground is about to land a four and a half pound coho...
Edit: BTW, this is a very nice photo.
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on Feb 23, 2008 20:47:39 GMT -8
Continuing on with a little V class history... Front cover of the BCF employee newsletter Fleet Bulletin - June 1972. The drawing on this cover is by my brother, and the article is from his (Mr DOT) collection.
|
|
|
Post by Northern Exploration on Feb 24, 2008 7:18:00 GMT -8
That same drawing is in the "Queens of the Fleet" isn't it? Always thought it was skillfully done and a good demonstration of the differences between the pre and post stretched ferries.
|
|
|
Post by markkarj on Feb 24, 2008 12:05:56 GMT -8
As it was these heightening jobs were done in periods of about 5 months; a little longer for the Esq. & Saanich which also were re-engined. Compare this with the time required to do the MLU's on the 'C' class of recent years. A very interesting set of posts... I've learned a lot more about the V-class upgrade in the past few minutes. One question: when were the Vancouver and Victoria re-engined prior to lifting? I was under the impression the four original ships that were lifted had their engines replaced during that upgrade, but the newspaper story suggests the Victoria and Vancouver had their engines replaced earlier. The Bannermann book indicates that the Vic, Van, Saanich and Esquimalt all had very unreliable engines at first.
|
|