|
Post by Low Light Mike on Sept 23, 2013 18:35:34 GMT -8
I dont mind the Island Sky but I dont know if I want to spend 6 hours on that boat all at once. I would if it was the Chilliwack. 6 hours and 35 minutes, if you include the time that the ship is in port at Saltery Bay (where I assume I can just purchase my return ticket from onboard in the Coastal Express). - I look forward to that amount of time on the I'Sky ! (or on any ship)
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,182
|
Post by Neil on Sept 23, 2013 20:54:53 GMT -8
Why would a ferry fan care what vessel it is, especially when you've been on every one, as Karl has?
Surely, the interesting thing about this crossing is that it has never been a ferry route, even in pre- BC Ferries days. It's unique, and short lived. It will probably never happen again. Whether it was aboard the Nimpkish, or the Spirit of British Columbia, I would want to do it.
Plus, I've done a rough strait crossing on the 'Chilliwack, so I know how it fares in rough seas. (Kind of like the floating shoebox it is.) I'm intrigued to see how the Island Sky might do, so if I can arrange to do a crossing, I'm hoping for some weather.
BC Ferries tells us the Island Sky is designed to skip over rough seas with aplomb... but they've also told Denman and Hornby residents that a 'hundred year' storm in Baynes Sound is 35 knots. We will see. I hope to be aboard, even if I have to eat nuked mac and cheese for dinner.
|
|
Mill Bay
Voyager
Long Suffering Bosun
Posts: 2,886
|
Post by Mill Bay on Sept 24, 2013 11:54:54 GMT -8
I dont mind the Island Sky but I dont know if I want to spend 6 hours on that boat all at once. I would if it was the Chilliwack. 6 hours and 35 minutes, if you include the time that the ship is in port at Saltery Bay (where I assume I can just purchase my return ticket from onboard in the Coastal Express). - I look forward to that amount of time on the I'Sky ! (or on any ship) I'm surprised that Neil left the possibility open of doing this trip on the Queen of Chilliwack... He didn't specifically say he would turn away from doing that. We all know Karl would. I personally wouldn't mind, as long as she was only using two RADs, but if it was the Queen of Chilliwack, we'd probably be stuck on her for 6 hours one way, and all end up sleeping on the floor. The solarium would probably be too cold in February, we may want to move the microwaves in there for the ambient heat. If the only option, though, was to use the Island Sky's instant food services, I think I will bring my own.
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Oct 2, 2013 14:15:01 GMT -8
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,182
|
Post by Neil on Oct 2, 2013 16:56:13 GMT -8
White said that some of the new menu items for breakfast include cinnamon toast with maple syrup, omelet with sausages and fried potatoes and hand-held breakfast sandwiches and wraps. 'Hand held' sandwiches? As opposed to the kind that you hold with your feet? Or, if you're Justin Bieber, the kind you get someone else to hold for you?
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Oct 2, 2013 17:06:19 GMT -8
'Hand held' sandwiches? As opposed to the kind that you hold with your feet? Or, if you're Justin Bieber, the kind you get someone else to hold for you? I often use a sandwich tripod when eating on BC Ferries. However, BC Ferries frowns upon its use on their premises (they say that it takes up too much room on the table and makes me look like a professional eater), and so I'm working at adapting to eating my sandwiches in a hand-held style.
|
|
|
Post by Northern Exploration on Oct 3, 2013 11:26:58 GMT -8
'Hand held' sandwiches? As opposed to the kind that you hold with your feet? Or, if you're Justin Bieber, the kind you get someone else to hold for you? I often use a sandwich tripod when eating on BC Ferries. However, BC Ferries frowns upon its use on their premises (they say that it takes up too much room on the table and makes me look like a professional eater), and so I'm working at adapting to eating my sandwiches in a hand-held style. For the Extreme Smart Phone Addicted types you might be onto something here. A sandwich tripod would allow the person too eat their sub, sandwich and with the proper attachment a breakfast burrito, and not be inconvenienced by the 10 second break in googling, texting, blogging, or tweeting etc. required to pick up and take a bite of a sandwich. Once you lose those seconds you will never get them back. Sell for $9.99 plus shipping and handling ($22.95), and wait, respond before the end of this commercial and get a second Sandwich tripod free. Yes folks, that's two Sandwich Tripods for only $9.99 plus shipping and handling. Go for it Flug, you can be the next Mr. Sticky, and retire early on your direct product sales. You will be clearly recognizable on the Shopping Channel because to my knowledge no other product flogger (or is it Flugger) wears a Tilley hat.
|
|
Mill Bay
Voyager
Long Suffering Bosun
Posts: 2,886
|
Post by Mill Bay on Oct 7, 2013 18:55:26 GMT -8
'Hand held' sandwiches? As opposed to the kind that you hold with your feet? Or, if you're Justin Bieber, the kind you get someone else to hold for you? I often use a sandwich tripod when eating on BC Ferries. However, BC Ferries frowns upon its use on their premises (they say that it takes up too much room on the table and makes me look like a professional eater), and so I'm working at adapting to eating my sandwiches in a hand-held style. Actually, I see a new hallowed ceremony that can be performed along side the Cinny-bun observances. The hand-held sandwich of Coastal mystery. Wasn't there a movie one time that had the cellphone hidden in the submarine sandwich? This will be the opposite: hide your sandwich in your smartphone, and BCFerries will never know, and how can they give you static for having a digital sandwich, when all the other tourists have a smartphone too?
|
|
Koastal Karl
Voyager
Been on every BC Ferry now!!!!!
Posts: 7,747
|
Post by Koastal Karl on Oct 22, 2013 21:10:26 GMT -8
How are they gonna have three ships at Saltery Bay at 10pm??? The Island Sky at 10pm to Nanaimo, the Chilliwack to Earls Cove at 9:55pm and the NIP at 10pm to Texada?? Am I reading this right, lol!
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Oct 31, 2013 15:54:11 GMT -8
Today, October 31, 2013, is the first day that a ferry has worked doubled-ended on the Comox-Westview run. Ever.
Really? you might ask...
Comox Queen inaugurated the service, and our beloved Tenaka is a single ender.
So too are the: - Sechelt Queen (ex Chinook II) - Princess of Vancouver - Queens of Sidney and Tsawwassen - Queen of Burnaby
During the 'Burnaby break-down a few years ago, both the North Island Princess and the Tachek worked the Comox route, and both are single-enders.
Ok, so there's one ship that I haven't mentioned yet: the Queen of Chilliwack.
True, the Chilliwack looks like a double-ender and is designed to be operated as such. And she is currently operating as a double-ender on the Jervis Inlet route. However, in her 2 gigs on the Comox Route, she was operated as a single-ender ship. The watertight end was always used as the bow and she had to spin.
So this current work by Island Sky on the Comox route is the first time that this route has seen a ferry operating double-ended. - It only took 49 years for it to happen.
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Nov 2, 2013 12:08:00 GMT -8
A family member of mine took Island Sky from Comox to Westview, yesterday. The brief report: - her car was on the forward ramp of the gallery deck, with a tire properly blocked by the crew.
No problems or confusion by her finding her way around the ship, especially from the possibly-confusing gallery deck to the passenger deck above.
Lounge seating was comfortable and the ride was comfortable.
No Coastal Express purchases attempted.
=-----------------------------
In other related news, Island Sky is just about to complete her 2nd round-trip of a windy Saturday. (wind gusts of 45 km/h) - We'll see if she does her 3rd and 4th round trips today.
So far, she looks to be a better ship than the crippled Burnaby, re the ability to handle weather. That comparison is impacted by the Burnaby's problem propeller shaft, which causes many safety cancellations. Most ships are better than the crippled Burnaby.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 2, 2013 23:04:32 GMT -8
I believe the absolute best use for the chilliwack is-RAZOR BLADES!!!!
That boat is junk and it should be scrapped.
There- I said it.
And to be fair so should the queen of Alberni!
|
|
|
Post by compdude787 on Nov 3, 2013 18:30:21 GMT -8
And to be fair so should the queen of Alberni! What makes you think that? At least the Alberni does work well on Route 30.
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Nov 4, 2013 8:23:01 GMT -8
A few of us ferry forum members did a round-trip on the Island Sky on Route-17, on Sunday.
Seakeeping wise, the ship was smooth and apparently she also did well on Saturday when there were moderate winds.
Operations wise, there were extra crew and officers on board doing familiarization work. Basically the 2nd person shadowing the first person. Obviously a new ship to a route will result in extra "famming."
Passenger comfort wise, we saw some good and bad. - The 3:15pm trip had a modest number of passengers on board, and the inside cabin didn't seem too crowded.
- The 5:00pm trip had a large number of foot passengers on board (a few kids sports teams and a seniors group) and the inside cabin was uncomfortably crowded. Adding to the problem was the hyperactivity of the kids sports teams in a small confined space.
Us ferry forum folk found refuge in the aft end of the main car deck. Sheltered from the wind and the other passengers. But it was cold. If it were raining, a busy sailing would be uncomfortable.
So what does this mean? For the low passenger trips, the cabin is fine. For the high passenger trips, the cabin is not fine. This high count would likely occur on certain sailings on most Fridays and Sundays year round. Long weekend travel would be unbearable for a few sailings.
...and if this is an indication of this type of ship's passenger experience on say Route-9, then the new planned ships for Route-9 will be uncomfortable a lot of the time on weekends re the small overcrowded cabin.
|
|
|
Post by compdude787 on Nov 4, 2013 13:02:08 GMT -8
Passenger comfort wise, we saw some good and bad. - The 3:15pm trip had a modest number of passengers on board, and the inside cabin didn't seem too crowded. - The 5:00pm trip had a large number of foot passengers on board (a few kids sports teams and a seniors group) and the inside cabin was uncomfortably crowded. Adding to the problem was the hyperactivity of the kids sports teams in a small confined space. Us ferry forum folk found refuge in the aft end of the main car deck. Sheltered from the wind and the other passengers. But it was cold. If it were raining, a busy sailing would be uncomfortable. So what does this mean? For the low passenger trips, the cabin is fine. For the high passenger trips, the cabin is not fine. This high count would likely occur on certain sailings on most Fridays and Sundays year round. Long weekend travel would be unbearable for a few sailings. ...and if this is an indication of this type of ship's passenger experience on say Route-9, then the new planned ships for Route-9 will be uncomfortable a lot of the time on weekends re the small overcrowded cabin. So, hopefully the I-Sky's stint on Route 17 will send a message to BC Ferries that they need to have a larger passenger cabin on the new 145-car ferries, and probably one nearly as large on the 125-car ferry too. It should be able to hold at least as many passengers as the Nanaimo. A pax capacity of 585 passengers will not be sufficient, especially considering that the Burnaby and Nanaimo have a capacity of 897 and 996 passengers respectively. Clearly, BCF needs ferries with a passenger capacity of at least 900 passengers. The I-Sky has a pax capacity of 462 passengers. If the cabin is getting extremely crowded with 450 passengers, a 585-passenger cabin (currently planned for the new ferries) will not be much of an improvement. I seriously hope BCF will be observing how crowded the cabin can get on the I-Sky, so it won't end up building ferries that have passenger cabins that end up being like the Kitsap on the Bremerton route.
|
|
Koastal Karl
Voyager
Been on every BC Ferry now!!!!!
Posts: 7,747
|
Post by Koastal Karl on Nov 4, 2013 14:21:57 GMT -8
Mike would you say the Island Sky cabin is smaller than the Cumberland cabin? I thought it was!
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Nov 4, 2013 14:35:13 GMT -8
Mike would you say the Island Sky cabin is smaller than the Cumberland cabin? I thought it was! It seemed like the hallways on either side on the Cumberland/Capilano are longer. ie. it takes longer to walk from one end of the cabin to the other, on the Cumberland/Capilano. But I think the I'Sky cabin is a bit wider.
|
|
|
Post by Mike C on Nov 4, 2013 15:42:17 GMT -8
Brace yourselves. Obligatory response from all Mikes approaching. Mike would you say the Island Sky cabin is smaller than the Cumberland cabin? I thought it was! By size, the Island Sky's cabin is definitely bigger than that of the Capilano/Cumberland. It would be interesting to compare seating numbers though.
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,182
|
Post by Neil on Nov 4, 2013 18:28:21 GMT -8
Brace yourselves. Obligatory response from all Mikes approaching. Mike would you say the Island Sky cabin is smaller than the Cumberland cabin? I thought it was! By size, the Island Sky's cabin is definitely bigger than that of the Capilano/Cumberland. It would be interesting to compare seating numbers though. The three boats are basically identical in length, and I think the length of the cabins are very similar... but the corpulent ' Sky is 5.2 metres wider, so therein lies the difference.
|
|
Koastal Karl
Voyager
Been on every BC Ferry now!!!!!
Posts: 7,747
|
Post by Koastal Karl on Nov 4, 2013 23:32:37 GMT -8
It might be wider but it dose not look longer from the photos I have. I think the Cumberland's cabin is longer. I am using this as an example the Island Sky has 10 windows along the sides the Cumberland has 18 windows along the side. Definately longer. Island Sky has 10 windows in the front plus the door on the one side vs the Cumberland has 10 windows too but no door on the side making the Island Sky a bit wider but to me the Cumberland has a longer passenger cabin. When I first saw the Island Sky at Little River I thought man that is small boat looking at the passenger cabin for a far! I would rather take the Cumberland on route 17! The Cumberland is actually a little less in length than the Island Sky but not by much according to the fleet profile page but she carries 2 more vehicles than the Island Sky, lol!
|
|
|
Post by compdude787 on Nov 5, 2013 7:44:19 GMT -8
It might be wider but it dose not look longer from the photos I have. I think the Cumberland's cabin is longer. I am using this as an example the Island Sky has 10 windows along the sides the Cumberland has 18 windows along the side. Definately longer. Island Sky has 10 windows in the front plus the door on the one side vs the Cumberland has 10 windows too but no door on the side making the Island Sky a bit wider but to me the Cumberland has a longer passenger cabin. When I first saw the Island Sky at Little River I thought man that is small boat looking at the passenger cabin for a far! I would rather take the Cumberland on route 17! The Cumberland is actually a little less in length than the Island Sky but not by much according to the fleet profile page but she carries 2 more vehicles than the Island Sky, lol! The Island Sky is 102.4 meters while the Cappy and Q-Cumber are 96 meters. Remember that the Q-Cumber carries two more vehicles because of the platform decks. These would be unlikely to be used on Route 17 because of the extra time involved with loading.
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,182
|
Post by Neil on Nov 5, 2013 9:26:31 GMT -8
It might be wider but it dose not look longer from the photos I have. I think the Cumberland's cabin is longer. I am using this as an example the Island Sky has 10 windows along the sides the Cumberland has 18 windows along the side. Definately longer. Island Sky has 10 windows in the front plus the door on the one side vs the Cumberland has 10 windows too but no door on the side making the Island Sky a bit wider but to me the Cumberland has a longer passenger cabin. When I first saw the Island Sky at Little River I thought man that is small boat looking at the passenger cabin for a far! I would rather take the Cumberland on route 17! The Cumberland is actually a little less in length than the Island Sky but not by much according to the fleet profile page but she carries 2 more vehicles than the Island Sky, lol! The Island Sky is 102.4 meters while the Cappy and Q-Cumber are 96 meters. Remember that the Q-Cumber carries two more vehicles because of the platform decks. These would be unlikely to be used on Route 17 because of the extra time involved with loading. Transport Canada has the ' Capilano at 95.98 metres, and the Island Sky at 95.72 metres. I trust their numbers more the BC Ferries profile page.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 5, 2013 11:16:01 GMT -8
They need to build ships as big as the Burnaby and Nanaimo to replace them.
This dangerous and unsafe practice of having undersized ships on open water is going to lead to a disaster one day.
No way in h*** should an open deck ferry operate on routes meant for closed deck ships.
B.C. Ferries needs to hire SMART people to design the new ships-not money pinching trolls.
I remember as a small child going to powell river on the Powell River Queen-NOT a fun ride in rough weather!
I would not go on the Island Sky for that trip either, OR the Chilliwack
|
|
|
Post by compdude787 on Nov 5, 2013 13:01:20 GMT -8
The Island Sky is 102.4 meters while the Cappy and Q-Cumber are 96 meters. Remember that the Q-Cumber carries two more vehicles because of the platform decks. These would be unlikely to be used on Route 17 because of the extra time involved with loading. Transport Canada has the ' Capilano at 95.98 metres, and the Island Sky at 95.72 metres. I trust their numbers more the BC Ferries profile page. Why does BC Ferries not know anything about their own darn ships? How hard is it to get the info on the fleet page right?
|
|
Koastal Karl
Voyager
Been on every BC Ferry now!!!!!
Posts: 7,747
|
Post by Koastal Karl on Nov 5, 2013 13:19:03 GMT -8
You do know the Chilliwack is not an open deck ferry? I would actually rather take the Chilliwack on the Comox to Powell River route!
|
|