|
Post by Kahloke on Jan 31, 2020 19:56:58 GMT -8
Regarding the car-deck slope/hump design of the Salish Class: My elderly mother in-law avoids traveling on Salish Class as a foot-passenger, because of not being comfortable walking up/down the steep hill on the main car deck, on her way from dock to elevator. The slope is the issue for her personal stability and mobility. Your post regarding the slope of the Salish Class car deck got me thinking about some of the other ferries our friends in Poland have built recently. The one I am mostly thinking of is Toll (yes, a "Toll" ferry did not go unnoticed by me), built for Praamid, the Estonian ferry company that took over operations to Saaremaa Island. Some of you may remember one of the previous vessels that served that route, Kamutik W, formerly Hiiumaa, is now in Eastern Canada plying the Saint Barbe, NF - Blanc Sablon, QC route. Anyway, Praamid has some new ferries, a few of which are built by Remontowa, and they are very similar in size, function, and even look to the Salish Class vessels. What piqued my interest relative to Mike's post is one of the car deck photos I have seen of "Toll". It carries around 150 vehicles, similar to the Salish vessels, and it, too, has a sloping car deck, but they did the inverse of the Salish Class design. The main car deck slopes down toward the middle, and is flanked by two raised gallery decks on the sides, much like Island Sky. Those gallery decks are almost level - a different way of accommodating around the same number of vehicles, and with less moving parts. The gallery decks are fixed, so no need to raise and lower hatches. It wouldn't solve the accessibility issue, however - main car deck still slopes, just differently. Here's a link to the "Toll" ferry, and there are some photos in the article, one of which is the car deck photo so you can see what I am on about: www.polandatsea.com/toll-double-ended-ferry-arrived-in-estonia/So, not entirely relevant to this thread, but I find it interesting to see what other ferry operators are using, particularly when it's vessels of similar size to what our ferries use, and even built by the same company.
|
|
|
Post by Dane on Jan 31, 2020 21:42:33 GMT -8
Did this fourth boat seem to take a lot longer than usual from (second) approval from the Commission to purchase? Not that it's a particularly relevant thing but generally the Commission has said, for new vessels, "yes" followed by a contract announcement in days rather than months; I believe we're at three or four months since the second proposal was obtained to purchase.
|
|
|
Post by Starsteward on Feb 2, 2020 13:22:54 GMT -8
By my own admission, I am absolutely no mathematics genius, never have been, never will, it's not in my DNA (apparently). However, reading the contract awarded yesterday to Remontowa something caught my eye and my initial reaction was, 'Huh'? On July 3, 2014, BCFS awarded a contract to Remontowa for 3 Salish class vessels at a total cost of $165 million dollars. (Canadian I suspect). That breaks down to $ 55 million each. Ok, Got that so far. January 31, 2020, BCFS awards Remontowa a contract for ONE (1) Salish class vessel at a price-tag of $92.3 million dollars. I am fundamentally aware of currency fluctuations over the course of time, but an increase of $ 37.3 million dollars for one vessel??? An increase like that I could see in todays' real estate market, but holy toledo… what's up with that big an increase to build a Salish class vessel? And, looking down the road, we are going to replace the 'C' class vessels? Someone had best alert the Ferry Commissioner to stock up on his head-ache relief meds as this dollar escalation is getting really _______!
|
|
|
Post by timmyc on Feb 2, 2020 13:33:05 GMT -8
Part of it might be the cost of retooling the shipyard to build that fourth vessel, which also comes without the benefit of the economies of scale that comes with building three ships at once - you have to order one-off engineering equipment, one-off metal sheets and composites/plastics, one-off everything for just that one ship. Then there may also be new technologies involved that increase the cost, even though as a civilian vessel, those should be quite limited.
|
|
|
Post by Starsteward on Feb 3, 2020 7:58:49 GMT -8
Part of it might be the cost of retooling the shipyard to build that fourth vessel, which also comes without the benefit of the economies of scale that comes with building three ships at once - you have to order one-off engineering equipment, one-off metal sheets and composites/plastics, one-off everything for just that one ship. Then there may also be new technologies involved that increase the cost, even though as a civilian vessel, those should be quite limited. What all is entailed in 'retooling' the shipyard? I would 'assume', yes, I know that word may be synonymous with uncovering a snake pit of problems however Remontowa should not have to order 'one-off' engineering equipment to basically duplicate a construction process that they have used to construct 3 vessels already. Unless BCFS has made significant changes to the overall design plan for this new vessel, I would suspect Remontowa would not have to incur a large expense in pulling out the old plans and firing up the steel cutting machines. Is it not possible that some 'new technologies' may actually be cheaper than what was used in the production of the initial 'Salish' triplets? New technologies, if incorporated into the new vessel should not come at a prohibitive cost increase, unless BCFS believes they can whiffle a large increase passed the Ferry Commissioner. As you correctly state, an increase in costs for a civilian vessel should be quite limited, let's hope that is the case here. The bare dollar increase in the cost of ONE new vessel has risen $ 37,300,000.00 since 2014, when the per vessel cost was approximately $55 million dollars. Today's 2020 bargain price for ONE Salish class vessel, $ 92.3 million? LUCY! You've got some 'splainin' to do.
|
|
|
Post by vancouverecho on Feb 3, 2020 19:03:35 GMT -8
Part of it might be the cost of retooling the shipyard to build that fourth vessel, which also comes without the benefit of the economies of scale that comes with building three ships at once - you have to order one-off engineering equipment, one-off metal sheets and composites/plastics, one-off everything for just that one ship. Then there may also be new technologies involved that increase the cost, even though as a civilian vessel, those should be quite limited. What all is entailed in 'retooling' the shipyard? I would 'assume', yes, I know that word may be synonymous with uncovering a snake pit of problems however Remontowa should not have to order 'one-off' engineering equipment to basically duplicate a construction process that they have used to construct 3 vessels already. Unless BCFS has made significant changes to the overall design plan for this new vessel, I would suspect Remontowa would not have to incur a large expense in pulling out the old plans and firing up the steel cutting machines. Is it not possible that some 'new technologies' may actually be cheaper than what was used in the production of the initial 'Salish' triplets? New technologies, if incorporated into the new vessel should not come at a prohibitive cost increase, unless BCFS believes they can whiffle a large increase passed the Ferry Commissioner. As you correctly state, an increase in costs for a civilian vessel should be quite limited, let's hope that is the case here. The bare dollar increase in the cost of ONE new vessel has risen $ 37,300,000.00 since 2014, when the per vessel cost was approximately $55 million dollars. Today's 2020 bargain price for ONE Salish class vessel, $ 92.3 million? LUCY! You've got some 'splainin' to do. I suspect it would primarily be re-configuring tooling to produce a one-off, versus having the ability to use the same machinery multiple times to produce multiple ships of the same configuration.
Shipyards generally can drive very high efficiencies and cost savings if they can do long production runs of a similar design, and re-configuring to build one ship and then re-configuring to build another type adds costs.
Also, there are significant discounts from various vendors for large orders; a vendor might be more willing and able to give you a discount on 3 sets of engines, compared to 1 set of engines, and those discounts can be fairly significant.
I also suspect the cost of steel has also gone up; one source indicated that the cost of steel has increased by 30% since 2016:
|
|
|
Post by Starsteward on Feb 6, 2020 15:19:19 GMT -8
What all is entailed in 'retooling' the shipyard? I would 'assume', yes, I know that word may be synonymous with uncovering a snake pit of problems however Remontowa should not have to order 'one-off' engineering equipment to basically duplicate a construction process that they have used to construct 3 vessels already. Unless BCFS has made significant changes to the overall design plan for this new vessel, I would suspect Remontowa would not have to incur a large expense in pulling out the old plans and firing up the steel cutting machines. Is it not possible that some 'new technologies' may actually be cheaper than what was used in the production of the initial 'Salish' triplets? New technologies, if incorporated into the new vessel should not come at a prohibitive cost increase, unless BCFS believes they can whiffle a large increase passed the Ferry Commissioner. As you correctly state, an increase in costs for a civilian vessel should be quite limited, let's hope that is the case here. The bare dollar increase in the cost of ONE new vessel has risen $ 37,300,000.00 since 2014, when the per vessel cost was approximately $55 million dollars. Today's 2020 bargain price for ONE Salish class vessel, $ 92.3 million? LUCY! You've got some 'splainin' to do. I suspect it would primarily be re-configuring tooling to produce a one-off, versus having the ability to use the same machinery multiple times to produce multiple ships of the same configuration.
Shipyards generally can drive very high efficiencies and cost savings if they can do long production runs of a similar design, and re-configuring to build one ship and then re-configuring to build another type adds costs.
Also, there are significant discounts from various vendors for large orders; a vendor might be more willing and able to give you a discount on 3 sets of engines, compared to 1 set of engines, and those discounts can be fairly significant.
I also suspect the cost of steel has also gone up; one source indicated that the cost of steel has increased by 30% since 2016:
I would agree that the price of steel may have increased since the first 3 vessels were built, BUT, good grief, $93 million for one boat?? Long gone are the days when we could build our fleet at home and produce vessels like the Queen of Prince Rupert for 6 million and change.
|
|
|
Post by Dane on Mar 26, 2020 7:42:01 GMT -8
Boat 4 laid down today: /
|
|
|
Post by Starsteward on Mar 26, 2020 9:32:21 GMT -8
With the increased cost of this vessel compared to its' sisters, I can't wait to see the in-laid gold BC Ferries logo etched onto the interior decks. Please forward any special cleaning instructions that weren't included with the design plans of the 'sisters'. Also, please forward a copy of the original order agreement, denoting the finished vessel/float-out cost, my flat-mate apparently used the one you sent as a backdrop on his dart board.
|
|
|
Post by 1foot2ships on Jun 14, 2020 19:33:08 GMT -8
im way late to the discussion, but... ... The bare dollar increase in the cost of ONE new vessel has risen $ 37,300,000.00 since 2014, when the per vessel cost was approximately $55 million dollars. Today's 2020 bargain price for ONE Salish class vessel, $ 92.3 million? LUCY! You've got some 'splainin' to do. even with consideration of the possible explanations offered, im still inclined to agree with you Starsteward and question this enormous % increase in costs. you guys have quoted the sailish class to be 55M + 55M + 55M (~2013 figures?) + 92M = $257M CDN i hate revealing this, (b/c i think its a sham they were not built domestically), but to be fair, i found this data quite surprising. (2007 figures) www.wsdot.wa.gov/Projects/Ferries/144CarFerries/default.htmwhat im getting at: scroll down to " Funding" if i am reading this correct, and if im allowed to simplify, 'sigh'... it looks like i have no reason to complain. (sorry to get your hopes up Starsteward... but then again, since Trump 2016, ive learnt a new concept called fake news so who knows?)
|
|
|
Post by timmyc on Jun 15, 2020 13:07:46 GMT -8
Are those 2007 figures? Since the negotiations over pricing and scheduling were concluded in 2011, I would've figured that for the dollar-year. Anyways, for those who don't want to go through the link, the WA figures shows each Olympic class to be ~$140.75 million USD. If we use the fairly typical exchange rate of 1.35 CAD per USD, that's $190m CAD per ship - and ships that have only ~six more AEQs than the Salish.
|
|
|
Post by Kahloke on Jun 15, 2020 13:21:03 GMT -8
Are those 2007 figures? Since the negotiations over pricing and scheduling were concluded in 2011, I would've figured that for the dollar-year. Anyways, for those who don't want to go through the link, the WA figures shows each Olympic class to be ~$140.75 million USD. If we use the fairly typical exchange rate of 1.35 CAD per USD, that's $190m CAD per ship - and ships that have only ~six more AEQs than the Salish. As much as I am for building locally, there is a price to be paid for keeping it at home, and it's lack of competition. The local ship builders are expensive, and because of the "build in Washington" clause, they can pretty much charge whatever they want. I think the state would get a better price if they allowed shipbuilding companies in other parts of the United States to bid on ferry projects. Certainly they would if they were to go shopping overseas the way BC Ferries does, but I think Jones Act gets in the way of that, if I'm not mistaken (and I could be).
|
|
|
Post by Starsteward on Jun 15, 2020 15:42:59 GMT -8
Are those 2007 figures? Since the negotiations over pricing and scheduling were concluded in 2011, I would've figured that for the dollar-year. Anyways, for those who don't want to go through the link, the WA figures shows each Olympic class to be ~$140.75 million USD. If we use the fairly typical exchange rate of 1.35 CAD per USD, that's $190m CAD per ship - and ships that have only ~six more AEQs than the Salish. As much as I am for building locally, there is a price to be paid for keeping it at home, and it's lack of competition. The local ship builders are expensive, and because of the "build in Washington" clause, they can pretty much charge whatever they want. I think the state would get a better price if they allowed shipbuilding companies in other parts of the United States to bid on ferry projects. Certainly they would if they were to go shopping overseas the way BC Ferries does, but I think Jones Act gets in the way of that, if I'm not mistaken (and I could be). I can't speak for our American friends on the 'keeping it at home' issue as I'm not familiar with the size of Washington States' ship-building capacity. ie. the number of qualified yards to meet WSF and Federal/State requirements. In B.C., especially in the Lower mainland there are not the number of qualified yards to churn out ferries as in days past when V.M.D., Burrard Yarrows, and Allied (on the Fraser River), were building boats faster than the government could put out tenders. In Canada and the U.S., Federal procurement of military vessels has remained 'in-country' for the obvious reasons of maintaining technological security. Even the once proud ship-building country of the U.K. opts to build 'at home', with the recent launching of the aircraft carrier, H.M.S. Queen Elizabeth.
Governments should also be wary of buying 'second-hand' vessels from allied governments.The Brits did a nice job of selling the Canadian Navy 3 submarines that we've spent more money repairing, than taxpayers need reminding. I've arrived at the expensive conclusion that when it comes to the procurement of civilian marine machines, namely in Canada, using local yards, of which there are a dwindling number, the price is going to reflect the non-competitive realities of the industry. The Canadian Federal government cannot chastise the good folks at BCFS for going off-shore to procure new vessels as they themselves have recently signed contracts for new vessels for operations in Newfoundland and Labrador. Nova Scotia has been buying vessels from overseas yards for considerable time as well. I guess the moral of the story is that ferry operators in North America are paying the price for a lack of local building capacity, that limits contract bidding competition. Canadian ferry operators at least are unshackled with the ability to contract abroad, yet still facing mind-boggling price increases over the past few years. The 'bean-counters' at BCFS are only too aware of the rising costs of their new-building ventures.
|
|
|
Post by Ferryman on Aug 2, 2020 22:02:15 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by jwjsamster on Sept 6, 2020 9:29:49 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on Sept 6, 2020 9:57:42 GMT -8
You can get that en anglais here.
|
|
|
Post by ferryfangeorge on Dec 21, 2020 22:30:17 GMT -8
Here is a video of them launching the fourth Salish class vessel.
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,192
|
Post by Neil on Dec 21, 2020 22:57:16 GMT -8
Here is a video of them launching the fourth Salish class vessel. If this was the 'Dear BC Ferries' website, I can just imagine the comments... "Can you believe how STUPID BC Ferries is? They built a ferry with no wheelhouse!"
|
|
|
Post by cbachmeier on Dec 22, 2020 0:49:15 GMT -8
I still cant figure out why BC Ferries has decided to name the vessels when they arrive in Victoria, my ideas for names were:
- MV Salish Bear - MV Salish Spirit - MV Salish Seas - MV Salish coast
and as a joke, just to be silly but MV Salish Crap.
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Dec 22, 2020 8:11:48 GMT -8
If this was the 'Dear BC Ferries' website, I can just imagine the comments... "Can you believe how STUPID BC Ferries is? They built a ferry with no wheelhouse!" "You are a bus, not a cruise-ship. So where are the rubber tires?"
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Dec 22, 2020 8:13:08 GMT -8
I still cant figure out why BC Ferries has decided to name the vessels when they arrive in Victoria... But, you said that you know everything.
|
|
|
Post by Kahloke on Dec 22, 2020 10:08:13 GMT -8
I still cant figure out why BC Ferries has decided to name the vessels when they arrive in Victoria, my ideas for names were: - MV Salish Bear - MV Salish Spirit - MV Salish Seas - MV Salish coast and as a joke, just to be silly but MV Salish Crap. Salish Bear could be interesting. It keeps the animal theme going; Orca Eagle, Raven, Bear - not bad.
|
|
|
Post by Blue Bus Fan on Dec 22, 2020 10:50:42 GMT -8
I still cant figure out why BC Ferries has decided to name the vessels when they arrive in Victoria, my ideas for names were: - MV Salish Bear - MV Salish Spirit - MV Salish Seas - MV Salish coast and as a joke, just to be silly but MV Salish Crap. Salish Bear could be interesting. It keeps the animal theme going; Orca Eagle, Raven, Bear - not bad. I agree because it does follow suit with other names. It could lead to a cool special livery for the vessel.
|
|
|
Post by cbachmeier on Dec 22, 2020 15:04:52 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by pacificcat99 on Dec 22, 2020 18:22:05 GMT -8
Quickly go and trademark the name Salish Bear! According to the Government of Canada Trademark Filings Website (Which was used previously this year to find the names of some of the Island Class and Malespina Sky, BC Ferries has Trademarked Kingfisher, Sandpiper, and Heron (which will probably be names of #4 and others unless they come up with something different) www.ic.gc.ca/app/opic-cipo/trdmrks/srch/home?lang=eng
|
|