rt1commuter
Chief Steward
JP - Overworked grad student
Posts: 167
|
Post by rt1commuter on Feb 3, 2009 2:16:34 GMT -8
IT's so true. Nothing smells like an old V. It's quite odd actually, you'd think that smell would be more common . Any ideas why the CC continues to be the primary? Does it have to do with her increased fuel efficiency as compared to the SofVI? Kind of blows the Tyee's argument out of the water . Do you know for sure that the CC has better fuel efficiency than the Spirits? Remember fuel consumed on the Spirits moves 400 cars and up to 2000 passengers versus 370 cars and 1650 passengers. Are you also suggesting the Tyee's fuel consumption numbers are fiction? I understand that those numbers come from data that BCFS collects, but does not share with their ultimate shareholders - the citizens of BC. Per passenger and per AEQ numbers are somewhat irrelevant since the ferries are running half-empty most of the time this time of year. Given that BCF is choosing to use the CC over the SofVI even though the SofVI has been ready to sail for a few days now suggests some advantage to running the CC. Notice that the SofVI doesn't return to service until the SofBC goes out of service later this month. From this, I infer that the cost per crossing of a Coastal is less than that of a Spook. (I believe that discussions here came to the same conclusion several weeks ago).
|
|
Nick
Voyager
Chief Engineer - Queen of Richmond
Posts: 2,078
|
Post by Nick on Feb 3, 2009 9:07:54 GMT -8
I think it's a combination of fuel and crewing that makes BCF run the coastal rather than the spook.
An A license crew on the Celebration is about 38 (I'm not sure, but I'm willing to put a tolerance of +/- 2 on that figure), whereas a Spirit requires 48. Also, according to the fuel numbers Dane posted a while ago (I'm not sure where they are and I don't have time to search right now) the Spirits require significantly more fuel per trip than the Coastals do.
Also, as rt1commuter says, per AEQ numbers are irrelevant at this time of year, since hardly any of the sailings sail at more than 60%.
|
|
|
Post by Dane on Feb 3, 2009 12:33:29 GMT -8
Coastal - A – 1571 / 33, B – 1177 / 27, C 881 / 23, D – 0 / 12 Spirit - A – 2052 / 48, B – 1532 / 40, C – 0 / 15 Van - A – 1272 / 34, B – 1163 / 31, C – 767 / 27, D – 450 / 23, E – 0 / 12
|
|
Nick
Voyager
Chief Engineer - Queen of Richmond
Posts: 2,078
|
Post by Nick on Feb 3, 2009 13:54:51 GMT -8
Wow, 33 on an A license? That's a lot less than I thought. Thanks for posting that, Dane. From a crewing perspective then, that makes the Coastals more than 30% cheaper to run than a Spirit.
|
|
|
Post by hwy19man on Feb 3, 2009 18:07:43 GMT -8
As recent events have proven, nothing is certain, so it is possible the Van might see a little bit more use after NW gets back, but if relieving the SoBC is her last gig, kind of cool to have her finish the way she started, as primary boat, route 1, Tsawwassen side. Kind of like the Saanich beginning and finishing as the secondary vessel out of SWB.
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on Feb 3, 2009 19:00:44 GMT -8
Coastal - A – 1571 / 33, B – 1177 / 27, C 881 / 23, D – 0 / 12 Spirit - A – 2052 / 48, B – 1532 / 40, C – 0 / 15 Van - A – 1272 / 34, B – 1163 / 31, C – 767 / 27, D – 450 / 23, E – 0 / 12 Dane, Can you confirm that the Coastal #'s you supplied above apply to all 3 vessels. The CC has the Buffet unlike its sisters and as a result maybe has different crewing #'s. Based only* on what you show re crew levels, and what I have seen re fuel efficiency & passenger/vehicle loads at this time of year, BCFS should probably park the Spirits & the Coastals and just run V's and C's. *Meaning yes, I know the V's are old and tired and are being pensioned off. Just for a moment lets say they were 20 years younger.
|
|
|
Post by Dane on Feb 4, 2009 0:27:58 GMT -8
Good question WCK. It does. I get these numbers by physically being on the vessels and typing them into my phone - everyone I have taken a trip with recently can speak to this annoying habit of mine Interestingly, based in the CR test results/reports BCF was able to get all three ships certified, which I take it is unusual because there is a Board ruling on the justification posted on the vessels. Obviously crew above the 33 may be on to cover the buffet if required. A very casual observation is that there seems to be less "service staff" in the CC buffet. And just for interest's sake: C-Class (sans Alberni) A – 1460 / 34, B – 1265 / 29, C – 841 / 23, D – 0 / 12
|
|
|
Post by chinook2 on Feb 4, 2009 0:58:14 GMT -8
As recent events have proven, nothing is certain, so it is possible the Van might see a little bit more use after NW gets back, but if relieving the SoBC is her last gig, kind of cool to have her finish the way she started, as primary boat, route 1, Tsawwassen side. Kind of like the Saanich beginning and finishing as the secondary vessel out of SWB.Almost the same. The Saanich was one of two primary vessels home porting at SB in 1963; 4 vessel baseline service began in 1962 when the Van and Vic joined the fleet Correct me anyone, but I don't recall service being reduced to 2 or 3 ships at any time prior to the V-class conversions in the early 1980s. Route 2 went down to 2 ship operation following the introduction of the Cow and Coq (after the doubling of fares in 1977) in slack times, but Route 1 needed the capacity of four "Victoria" or "Stretch" class boats plus the Alberni to handle traffic.
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,196
|
Post by Neil on Feb 4, 2009 9:46:14 GMT -8
Correct me anyone, but I don't recall service being reduced to 2 or 3 ships at any time prior to the V-class conversions in the early 1980s. Route 2 went down to 2 ship operation following the introduction of the Cow and Coq (after the doubling of fares in 1977) in slack times, but Route 1 needed the capacity of four "Victoria" or "Stretch" class boats plus the Alberni to handle traffic. My old schedules show that two or three boat operation on routes one and two in the off-season, particularly mid week, has been common throughout BC Ferries' history. Some years more than others.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 4, 2009 12:46:45 GMT -8
It was basically every odd hour sailing in the off season. The boats did run with an 10 or 11PM sailing sometimes, but it was stopped as a cost saving measure. One time we missed the sailing by three cars and thought that we were waiting for two hours, when the Alberni pulled into dock. Alberni was not on the ferry schedule, it just went back and forth with a load of vehicles, at that time. The Alberni was affectionately known as "The Truck Ferry" and was originally designed to take big trucks and over heights. Once they loaded on the vehicles, they loaded on the cars that were waiting.
In the past, as is now, I think that most repairs and modifications were done in the off season, as to not inconvenience the traveling public. Although,some ferries would be in the dry dock during the summer. Year end for the Government was always March 31. April 1 would always be a new budget, thus new projects to be started. I remember when BC Ferry Workers were on strike, they would sometimes picket the dry dock, if there was a BC Ferry in the dry dock.
|
|
|
Post by chinook2 on Feb 4, 2009 16:11:50 GMT -8
Correct me anyone, but I don't recall service being reduced to 2 or 3 ships at any time prior to the V-class conversions in the early 1980s. Route 2 went down to 2 ship operation following the introduction of the Cow and Coq (after the doubling of fares in 1977) in slack times, but Route 1 needed the capacity of four "Victoria" or "Stretch" class boats plus the Alberni to handle traffic. My old schedules show that two or three boat operation on routes one and two in the off-season, particularly mid week, has been common throughout BC Ferries' history. Some years more than others. Have you got any for 1963-77 that show this?? My recall is that both routes ran 4 boats year round until around that time.
|
|
|
Post by hwy19man on Feb 4, 2009 19:43:15 GMT -8
Good question WCK. It does. I get these numbers by physically being on the vessels and typing them into my phone - And just for interest's sake: C-Class (sans Alberni) A – 1460 / 34, B – 1265 / 29, C – 841 / 23, D – 0 / 12 The next time you are on the Alberni, do you think you could type the crew numbers on your phone please? ;D
|
|
|
Post by chinook2 on Feb 4, 2009 21:35:47 GMT -8
It was basically every odd hour sailing in the off season. The boats did run with an 10 or 11PM sailing sometimes, but it was stopped as a cost saving measure. One time we missed the sailing by three cars and thought that we were waiting for two hours, when the Alberni pulled into dock. Alberni was not on the ferry schedule, it just went back and forth with a load of vehicles, at that time. The Alberni was affectionately known as "The Truck Ferry" and was originally designed to take big trucks and over heights. Once they loaded on the vehicles, they loaded on the cars that were waiting. You're recollections are correct for the latter half of the 1970s. Up until 1976, however, a four vessel schedule was maintained on both routes, with the Sidney as main relief vessel--in the years when vessels were out longer for stretching the Sechelt would do one or two replacements on route 2. The sailing curtailments began in the wake of the first increase in ferry fares, by Bill Bennett's Social Credit government, in 1977. They doubled fares which had remained unchanged since 1960, and this caused a major drop in ridership. I will try and remember to dig up some news articles on this. In the meantime, this thread is about the QVan, so enough off topic... In the past, as is now, I think that most repairs and modifications were done in the off season, as to not inconvenience the traveling public. Although,some ferries would be in the dry dock during the summer. Year end for the Government was always March 31. April 1 would always be a new budget, thus new projects to be started. I remember when BC Ferry Workers were on strike, they would sometimes picket the dry dock, if there was a BC Ferry in the dry dock.
|
|
|
Post by Dane on Feb 4, 2009 22:13:10 GMT -8
Good question WCK. It does. I get these numbers by physically being on the vessels and typing them into my phone - And just for interest's sake: C-Class (sans Alberni) A – 1460 / 34, B – 1265 / 29, C – 841 / 23, D – 0 / 12 The next time you are on the Alberni, do you think you could type the crew numbers on your phone please? ;D I do it on every ship I go on - hope to have everything by the end of May Except the Kwuna actually.
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,196
|
Post by Neil on Feb 4, 2009 22:55:19 GMT -8
Sorry for the diversion, but, for 'chinook2's benefit.... a typical winter schedule from the '60s-early'70s, this from the winter of '68-'69. Two boat service on route 1 four days a week, extra sailings on weekends. As far as I know, BC Ferries never offered four boat service every day year round.
|
|
|
Post by Scott on Feb 4, 2009 23:50:50 GMT -8
Good question WCK. It does. I get these numbers by physically being on the vessels and typing them into my phone - And just for interest's sake: C-Class (sans Alberni) A – 1460 / 34, B – 1265 / 29, C – 841 / 23, D – 0 / 12 The next time you are on the Alberni, do you think you could type the crew numbers on your phone please? ;D I have a photo of the Alberni's. Here's the info (from just over a year ago): Class A - 1171/29, Class B - 750/22, Class C - 450/21, Class D - 0/12
|
|
|
Post by Dane on Feb 5, 2009 0:02:29 GMT -8
Do you have any others John? I have the C's, V's, Tsa, North, PRQ, Chilli, Coastals, PRQ Class, Cap Class, Skeena, Tenaka
|
|
|
Post by Dane on Feb 5, 2009 23:06:40 GMT -8
The Queen of Vancouver should be removed from service immediately. That's the title of my misplaced trip report - that fits in better with the topic here than it does with the trip report area. By Dane.... Apparently, there are still some sort of nagging issues plaguing the ship. Docking procedures were lengthy all day and that's what attributed for the delays. There is a new license in place as well: A – 816 / 34, B – 744 / 31, C – 648 / 27, D – 548 / 23, E – 0 / 12 It was obvious in early January they were not using the license I posted above, which allows 400 pax more on an A than the new one with the same crew level as the ship sold out so quickly. This is continuing. Terminal crews have obviously gotten acquainted to having the Spirits and CC in service together as both sides tried to load vehicle to the upper car deck that didn't fit. All day the vessel was sold out, 800 pax is too few for Rte 1, even when the sailings aren't full. Before an arm chair Captain comes out here and tries to spin this as a savings, save your time. The ship is running with 40 crew members; a B for the SoBC. That's 40 crew, 816 passengers as they're always running full. People were left behind today at several points - lost revenue. The vessel left with space on all three sailings I observed. The license is so heavily reduced as the vessel didn't meet safety prerequisites that came into effect 1 Jan 09 by TC. This, is in effect, a lack of confidence on their part in the vessel's life saving system for a large group of people as is the norm on the route. The vessel itself is quickly deteriorating in condition. There are no longer phones, but vending machines are being stocked. Captain Vancouver is gone. The Spirit of Vancouver Island should have been temporarily reassigned to Tsawwassen. Arguments are made that it's not their ship, and the Van Isl crews "take better care" and "don't want to loose it." That's all well and good, and I am very happy they take personal ownership but this is a transportation network foremost and the capacity should be used because it is available. The use of the CC instead of the SoVI, and the SoVI instead of the Van would lead to a capacity increase nearing 100% on the Van based departures! Currently people are being inconvenienced to an extreme amount. One semi was loaded when we left Tsawwassen this morning, about 12 were left behind. The SoVI was loading almost exclusively semi's on her MCD, and obviously PCL. I recognize the Van would still have to run as a number 2, but that's considerably more satisfactory. Comments were also mad both on the Vancouver about why there was an unused new ship, and at Victoria where many were left behind as the lovely CC sat there. This is a joke.
|
|
Mill Bay
Voyager
Long Suffering Bosun
Posts: 2,886
|
Post by Mill Bay on Feb 6, 2009 11:57:44 GMT -8
Dane, you are a heartless, cold, calculating miser, lol.. you are going to make the Van feel bad, now. Unfortunately it's all true... the only thing we don't know is what influenced the decisions at fleet operations that are keeping the Van running as a #1 even at reduced capacity. Perhaps they feel the capacity is adequate . Perhaps they just like the fact that the old V is dirt cheap to run as opposed to the CC or a Spirit, though certainly not in crewing costs. AS always, you seem to be good at getting photos from angles that no one else could have thought of.
|
|
|
Post by ferrytraveller on Feb 6, 2009 14:38:38 GMT -8
just a few points: yes the vancouver license dropped due to the safe manning document Transport canada issued all BC Ferries Vessels. For the Vancouvers Life Saving equipment, they needed 1 crew per life raft and 2 per life boat, which with 34 crew isn't possible. The vancouver is also only running for 1 week, so its not around long.
|
|
|
Post by ferryfan on Feb 7, 2009 20:50:07 GMT -8
just a few points: yes the vancouver license dropped due to the safe manning document Transport canada issued all BC Ferries Vessels. For the Vancouvers Life Saving equipment, they needed 1 crew per life raft and 2 per life boat, which with 34 crew isn't possible. The vancouver is also only running for 1 week, so its not around long. the vancouver is actually running on a spirit crew, which is 48 (catering, deck and engineering)
|
|
|
Post by Hardy on Feb 8, 2009 12:54:27 GMT -8
the vancouver is actually running on a spirit crew, which is 48 (catering, deck and engineering) This makes switching homeports for the SoVI and running the CC based out of SB all the more puzzling then. If they aren't saving salary money, then what are they thinking?
|
|
|
Post by landlubber on Feb 8, 2009 20:34:34 GMT -8
Getting back to the original subject.. how much longer does the Vancouver have? Is it the general consensus of everyone that she will be gone as soon as the New Westminster is put back in service?
|
|
|
Post by Esquimalt Queen on Feb 8, 2009 20:51:16 GMT -8
Thanks for getting back to the actual subject in this thread. Last I checked, RBI had the Queen of Vancouver scheduled until Feb 15th. With the way things have gone in the past, I'm sure the date is only tentative.
|
|
|
Post by Dane on Feb 9, 2009 1:41:53 GMT -8
She has a new license again... my phone died which has the info but it's around 1100 with 48 crew (Spirit crew) as the A, and B, C, D, E are the A, B, C, D from the license posted on 19 Dec 08. This one was posted on Friday.
|
|