|
Post by chokai on May 18, 2014 15:36:02 GMT -8
I do think it's foolish to send the Kitsap into the yard so soon after Tokitae joins, she should at least sit around a month or so in case something goes seriously sideways.... I also think it would make sense for Tokitae to spend her first few weeks or even months of her career on the Bremerton/Seattle run. She can up the capacity for the summer and she's much nearer the facilities as well as any backup boat. And both my uncle and I are confident after chatting today about Tokitae's arrival that there is no way they can reliably load 144 cars at Mukilteo and hold the schedule. However I know this won't happen as where she was to serve was specifically spelled out in the legislation authorizing her.
That said after the third 144 comes on line we'll have a net increase of about 60 car spaces in the system over before the steel fiasco. We'll also have 3 new boats that can readily serve on nearly every route in the system. That is not the same with the KDT's or the Evergreens as potential "backups". A new 80 to 100 car boat would only have marginally more utility throughout the system as a backup IMO. I know that ES did not keep up with traffic at Mukilteo/Clinton a few years ago.
But as much as I'd love to have a full backup boat frankly I'm not sure if it's truly worth keeping a boat around that might cost a million or more a year to maintain (Klahowya's annual dry docking alone was $700K). We certainly need boats to allow for regular maintainance but setting the system up so that there is always a boat on cold-standby at all times of the year as there was back in the day with the SE's, not so sure that's fiscally worthwhile given our budget reality today. Sure we can have a backup some of the time as schedules allow... But all of the time I just don't know...
On a micro level (i.e non many days breakdown) WSF has a 99%+ service level (99.5% on the JMII routes) which means that an average boat (say a Issaquah 130) would be down ~3.5 days in total per year. Overall we miss around 1,500 scheduled crossings a year. From years of watching service interruptions it seems that the vast majority are two or three crossings which wouldn't even allow a boat to get there often times. Frankly I wouldn't be surprised if less than 1/10th of those 1,500 would see the relief boat get there in time, putting the cost at well over $6,000 per crossing, not counting the crew and fuel. Where do you draw the line?
Of course there's isn't a good way to calculate "economic impact" over such a short term period, and WSF does not track/publish the amount of time the run is "underserved", they just count a boat as there is service. Could well be a rowboat.
|
|
|
Post by Cascadian Transport on May 18, 2014 19:12:51 GMT -8
I do think it's foolish to send the Kitsap into the yard so soon after Tokitae joins, she should at least sit around a month or so in case something goes awry.
Agreed. We don't know yet how the Tokitae will preform. It would be nice to have a spare Issaquah in case something goes haywire on the Tokitae. The ferry system makes approximately 370 sailings a day, and approximately 136,000 sailings per year. 1,500 cancellations is not great, but it is not terrible. If we kept a vessel in standby, we could cut that number a bit. If the Kitsap or Cathlamet were kept in standby over the summer, we would have a vessel that could replace the Tokitae, or any other vessel in a pinch. Only thing in the ferry system that could possibly go sideways is the Elwha in a storm.
|
|
|
Post by chokai on May 19, 2014 16:31:47 GMT -8
Running more sea trials off downtown late this afternoon and into the early evening. There seems to be marked predilection for doing that on nice sunny days. ;-)
|
|
|
Post by waferryfan on May 19, 2014 19:26:15 GMT -8
I wonder what the Tokitae's horn sounds like. Has anyone by chance heard it while on sea trials? Just curious. Probably hard to describe in words but figured I'd ask anyway. I guess I'll be hearing it quite often this summer when that fog rolls in off of Mukilteo! :-)
|
|
FNS
Voyager
The Empire Builder train of yesteryear in HO scale
Posts: 4,948
|
Post by FNS on May 19, 2014 19:45:09 GMT -8
I wonder what the Tokitae's horn sounds like. Has anyone by chance heard it while on sea trials? Just curious. Probably hard to describe in words but figured I'd ask anyway. I guess I'll be hearing it quite often this summer when that fog rolls in off of Mukilteo! :-) Some time ago, I received a message from WSF on this musically speaking subject with a good note. I'll keep all of you in suspense until your eardrums feel the blasts from her trumpets.
|
|
|
Post by chokai on May 20, 2014 14:52:14 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by Steve Rosenow on May 20, 2014 17:13:37 GMT -8
The thought of keeping that sundeck closed is asinine, even furthering my belief that it's a huge waste of resources putting the Tokitae on that route. They should have built one for that route without it.
|
|
|
Post by Chippewa on May 20, 2014 18:17:23 GMT -8
I would leave the Cathlamet on the Whidey Island route ,as it is they don't even used all of the spaces on the boats. I would then put the Tokitae on the Bremerton Route and then put the Kitsap on the Vashon Island. Real simple
|
|
|
Post by Kahloke on May 20, 2014 19:14:54 GMT -8
I would leave the Cathlamet on the Whidey Island route ,as it is they don't even used all of the spaces on the boats. I would then put the Tokitae on the Bremerton Route and then put the Kitsap on the Vashon Island. Real simple Mukilteo needs a larger vessel for the auto capacity, not the passenger capacity. Putting Tokitae there should go a long way to reduce traffic backups on that route. I agree that the OC class vessels are not really designed for that short of a route from a passenger capacity standpoint, but I also understand the ferry system's logic in building vessels that can be utilized on a number of different runs for interoperability. IMO, the OC vessels are really designed for the San Juans and Bremerton, and I am assuming that both of those routes will get these vessels.
|
|
|
Post by chokai on May 20, 2014 20:30:44 GMT -8
I think Chippewa was getting at the point that they can't load the Issaquah's fully with the current terminal setup before they have to leave to hold the schedule. And I do think that until 2016 a bigger boat is a waste on that run.
That said the Tokitae's passenger capacity, and indeed that of all the Olympics is really for the future. If we don't use it for 10 years that's still cheaper than grafting it in later in the boats career. They probably shouldn't have bothered to "finish" the sundeck on Tokitae though.
As Kahloke noted the auto capacity is badly needed, I have had to drive around on several occasions over the last few years during dates and times where in the past doing that was essentially unheard of. Walk on traffic at Mukilteo/Clinton has grown relatively rapidly over the last 5 years and that growth is without the significant transit improvements planned for the new terminal. Right now transit access and service at the Mukilteo terminal is terrible and the Clinton side is frankly not much better given the long walk up the hill to the parking lots. I still think it'll be at least 15 or 20 years before that sun deck is needed, unless they throw some serious money to set up a better solution for commuters.
On another topic, it looks like ferry routes might grow into capacity like highways do, at least a little. I noticed a while back that with the Chetzemoka Point Defiance/Tahlequah is up almost 6% over when Rhody served it which is massive compared to any other route in the system. It will be interesting to see what happens after all 3 Olympic class boats join the fleet I bet the routes they serve on will all see a boost, except maybe the San Juans.
|
|
|
Post by Steve Rosenow on May 20, 2014 20:55:47 GMT -8
I would leave the Cathlamet on the Whidey Island route ,as it is they don't even used all of the spaces on the boats. I would then put the Tokitae on the Bremerton Route and then put the Kitsap on the Vashon Island. Real simple Mukilteo needs a larger vessel for the auto capacity, not the passenger capacity. Putting Tokitae there should go a long way to reduce traffic backups on that route. I agree that the OC class vessels are not really designed for that short of a route from a passenger capacity standpoint, but I also understand the ferry system's logic in building vessels that can be utilized on a number of different runs for interoperability. IMO, the OC vessels are really designed for the San Juans and Bremerton, and I am assuming that both of those routes will get these vessels. Yes, but to close the sun deck off to save on not having to hire two more people, when taxpayers built those ferries and deserve every bit of right to use that space on summer days, is simply one of the most foolish moves I've ever seen out of WSF. Those ferries are much better suited on the Bremerton run. If they really had to, send a third Issaquah and use 3-boat service up there. At least that'd get the woefully-inadequate Kitsap off and out of Bremerton. As far as I'm concerned, I really could care less to ever see the Kitsap or ANY Issaquah-class on that run. I'm tired of standing room only trips on summer evenings - and I'm sure an overwhelming majority of commuters on that run are tiring of the feeling of being shuttled on the "M.V. Cattle Car".
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,171
|
Post by Neil on May 20, 2014 21:25:11 GMT -8
I realize it's the ferry fan's prerogative to sound off on where vessels should be placed, and it certainly makes for discussion on a forum. But really... do people actually think they have more insight than the operators? I suspect that if critics were to personally challenge George Capacci and Mike Corrigan as to where and why WSF and BCFC place their boats, they would be given very good reasons for why they are where they are. Sometimes, there are financial, logistical, and operational reasons that are beyond the grasp of laymen with limited information. It's not always as obvious as it seems to critics.
|
|
SolDuc
Voyager
West Coast Cyclist
SolDuc and SOBC - Photo by Scott
Posts: 2,055
|
Post by SolDuc on May 20, 2014 22:07:08 GMT -8
Well, the thing with the Tokitae is that two routes desperately need her. Mukilteo needs her because of her car capacity while Bremerton needs her for passenger capacity. The DOT being the DOT (aka very pro-car, even though WSF has admitted that passenger levels were on the rise and that they needed to meet that demand) they sent the boat to Mukilteo. Logically, Bremerton folks are angry but Mukilteo folks don't want to let her go, which is the discussion that we're having on this forum.
My two cents: If the Tokitae can sail at full capacity out of Mukilteo and keep the schedule, great! We just leave her there until she is joined by another Olympic and the Mukilteo dock is redone. If the Tokitae cannot keep the schedule, then why bother? If after the summer-long experiment she cannot keep the schedule then she should go to Bremerton (capacity at Vashon would remain the same with the Kitsap) and no Olympic would serve at Mukilteo until the dock is rebuilt, which is 2019 and not 2016. But then Bremerton passenger capacity isn't an issue anymore with more Olympics online. Just my two cents.
|
|
|
Post by chokai on May 20, 2014 22:52:24 GMT -8
Those ferries are much better suited on the Bremerton run. If they really had to, send a third Issaquah and use 3-boat service up there. Sadly there is no way 3 boat service would work on Mukilteo/Clinton with a 124 car boat with the current setup of the route. When running at full capacity Kit and Cat spend more time at the docks than in transit. The crossing is about 12 to 14 minutes (less in an emergency) with the boat spending between 16 and 18 minutes at the dock. Simply put you need another slip at Mukilteo...
The original plan back in the late 90's was for 3 boats some day, but that was made back in the heady days before the MVET tax went away. That's why there are already footings for a second south facing slip at Clinton on the dock. Finishing it out was discussed a bit around '06 when they first started talking about Mukilteo. I seem to recall some discussion of the route possibly getting another boat in the area of 80 to 100 cars, whether that be an Evergreen or the nixed 100 car boat. It's also as far as I can tell why the new Mukilteo dock is laid out how it is. Both docks are going to be pretty nicely setup to have one boat unloading and another loading without any traffic disruptions if another slip is plugged in.
You could conceivably run a smaller boat and slip it in between the 2 big boats but the gain would be tiny.
Well, the thing with the Tokitae is that two routes desperately need her. Mukilteo needs her because of her car capacity while Bremerton needs her for passenger capacity. The DOT being the DOT (aka very pro-car, even though WSF has admitted that passenger levels were on the rise and that they needed to meet that demand) they sent the boat to Mukilteo. Logically, Bremerton folks are angry but Mukilteo folks don't want to let her go, which is the discussion that we're having on this forum.
That is why it's a great thing we are getting Samish as soon as "early 2015". Vigor does seem to be hauling on her btw. Regardless of what goes down the current situation will only be for 6 to 8 months. If Yakima wasn't broken we'd be in much better shape, and who knows maybe she'll be back sooner than expected.
But what Bremerton really lacks is stability. The island has grown accustomed to the constant presence of Kit and Cat after 30 years of them being around with almost no change. The same cannot be said for musical ferries at Bremerton.
|
|
SolDuc
Voyager
West Coast Cyclist
SolDuc and SOBC - Photo by Scott
Posts: 2,055
|
Post by SolDuc on May 20, 2014 23:14:02 GMT -8
You could conceivably run a smaller boat and slip it in between the 2 big boats but the gain would be tiny. Hey, why not run the Hiyu as an extra boat? At least times spent at dock is short, and 34 cars across the water is still 34 cars across the water!
|
|
|
Post by chokai on May 20, 2014 23:19:00 GMT -8
Hey, why not run the Hiyu as an extra boat? At least times spent at dock is short, and 34 cars across the water is still 34 cars across the water! I think someone else has other plans for her though. ;-)
|
|
|
Post by Steve Rosenow on May 21, 2014 1:17:46 GMT -8
I realize it's the ferry fan's prerogative to sound off on where vessels should be placed, and it certainly makes for discussion on a forum. But really... do people actually think they have more insight than the operators? I suspect that if critics were to personally challenge George Capacci and Mike Corrigan as to where and why WSF and BCFC place their boats, they would be given very good reasons for why they are where they are. Sometimes, there are financial, logistical, and operational reasons that are beyond the grasp of laymen with limited information. It's not always as obvious as it seems to critics. Your sentiment will change and you'll be suredly singing a different tune once you've been subject to a ride on the Kitsap (or Chelan) on a heavy crossing out of Seattle or Bremerton. The last time I took a crossing on the Kitsap, there was not a place to sit in the cabin and people were forced to sit on cold hard steel out on the picklefork decks during an early evening crossing. One in which it rained about halfway. Try being a frequent commuter (my sister, who takes my brother-in-law over to Seattle frequently for chemo, often on the Kitsap) and to hear and see it all the time - standing room only crossings and cars out to the damned safety nets. Try experiencing it for once instead of sitting back armchair quarterbacking it.
|
|
|
Post by Steve Rosenow on May 21, 2014 1:39:21 GMT -8
And here's another thought that crossed my mind...
The Issaquah class boats were never designed with publically-accessible sun decks, which IMO was one of the most foolish designs I've ever imagined. Therefore, passengers on that run have had no incentive for the last 30 years to ever leave their cars, much less enjoy top-deck amenities - even in that brief a crossing.
Since the Tokitae has what seems to be a splendidly-designed sundeck, it makes absolutely no sense to shut it off to the taxpaying public who pays for - as well as the commuters who pay directly for it via the fare box - when there is a vast unknown in the sense that "Oh hey, this ferry has a top deck, let's check it out!" and people might actually be convinced to get out of their cars and enjoy a brief break of fresh air!
|
|
|
Post by Kahloke on May 21, 2014 4:43:33 GMT -8
I realize it's the ferry fan's prerogative to sound off on where vessels should be placed, and it certainly makes for discussion on a forum. But really... do people actually think they have more insight than the operators? I suspect that if critics were to personally challenge George Capacci and Mike Corrigan as to where and why WSF and BCFC place their boats, they would be given very good reasons for why they are where they are. Sometimes, there are financial, logistical, and operational reasons that are beyond the grasp of laymen with limited information. It's not always as obvious as it seems to critics. Your sentiment will change and you'll be suredly singing a different tune once you've been subject to a ride on the Kitsap (or Chelan) on a heavy crossing out of Seattle or Bremerton. The last time I took a crossing on the Kitsap, there was not a place to sit in the cabin and people were forced to sit on cold hard steel out on the picklefork decks during an early evening crossing. One in which it rained about halfway. Try being a frequent commuter (my sister, who takes my brother-in-law over to Seattle frequently for chemo, often on the Kitsap) and to hear and see it all the time - standing room only crossings and cars out to the damned safety nets. Try experiencing it for once instead of sitting back armchair quarterbacking it. You do realize who you are talking to here, no? If you had to put up with some of the same crap Neil has to getting to and from Hornby Island on basically glorified barges with a car-deck level passenger cabin that barely qualifies as such, you might be a little less harsh in your retort. Plus, he also gets to deal with the whole ill-conceived cable ferry fiasco and ever rising fares that makes what we pay on WSF routes seem trivial by comparison. We're getting three new vessels. Bremerton will get theirs, whether it's Samish or the 3rd boat, so I don't think we have a whole lot to complain about. Yes, getting the Issaquah's off the Bremerton run will be a very good thing, and it will happen.
|
|
|
Post by Barnacle on May 21, 2014 5:48:57 GMT -8
I've been keeping quiet on this thread for the most part, because I don't know a whole lot about the boat. But I'll weigh in on a few things: 1) PLACEMENT. I go with Neil on this one; leave it to the powers that be to determine where the vessel should operate. They have the master plan at their fingertips, as well as most of the considerations. HOWEVER, I'll leave some latitude for adjustment on this--the big handicap is going to be how long it takes to load and unload (which can take longer than loading, depending on the placement of traffic signals) the vessels. We simply don't know yet how long the Olympic dwell time will be. I've heard the occasional grumble that a 144 won't work at Mukilteo because of the dwell time, but I would suspect that a lot of that belief is based upon the dwell time of a Super-class vessel, which takes an inordinate amount of time to load due to its narrow beam. It takes very nearly as long to load a Super as it does a Jumbo, if you're trying to maximize space. It may yet be that, despite the legislation regarding vessel placement, that the Olympics simply won't work at South Whidbey until the second slip is in place at the new Mukilteo terminal. Gonna have to try it. Meanwhile, as mentioned, Olympic #3 is said to be going to Bremerton, Mr. Rosenow. Have a little patience.. and once again, a gentle reminder that there are other runs in the system besides the one you take. 2) SUN DECK. I've misjudged this issue greatly, I admit. I assumed that because accessing the sun deck was no big deal to me, it wasn't to anyone else either. I now know that if there's a sun deck on a vessel, Steve Rosenow and Koastal Karl are going to be on it. I tease a little here, but if there's two people in our tiny circle that are vocal about it, there will likely be others elsewhere. Leaving one sun deck "unfinished" would be penny-wise and pound-foolish; because it assumes that the vessel will never leave its initially planned run, ever ever ever. I'm against the idea of run-specific vessels. That being said, I'm not happy about the closure of the sun deck level on any run. Even in the San Juans in winter, though only a few people would be up there that time of year anyway. As a footnote, when the upper deck is closed to avoid having two extra crew members, usually that brings a passenger-count restriction. I have no idea if this is the case on the Olympic class, nor what it would be if there is. 3) THREE-BOAT SERVICE. Only briefly mentioned recently. There was, once upon a time, three-boat service on the South Whidbey run. However, they were smaller and slower vessels (usually the Kulshan, a Steel-Electric, and the Rhody, Olympic, or--when desperate--the Vashon). Even adding a third, smaller vessel wouldn't work on the Mukilteo side, because anything in our fleet that counts as "smaller" than an Issaquah--and check the fleet, guide, there aren't many anymore--is also slower and would inevitably fall behind.
|
|
|
Post by chokai on May 21, 2014 8:34:10 GMT -8
I've heard the occasional grumble that a 144 won't work at Mukilteo because of the dwell time, but I would suspect that a lot of that belief is based upon the dwell time of a Super-class vessel, which takes an inordinate amount of time to load due to its narrow beam. It takes very nearly as long to load a Super as it does a Jumbo, if you're trying to maximize space. It may yet be that, despite the legislation regarding vessel placement, that the Olympics simply won't work at South Whidbey until the second slip is in place at the new Mukilteo terminal. Gonna have to try it. Well to be honest my concerns in this area have not a whole lot to do with a Super. And I wouldn't say "won't work" as much as "won't be optimal". On busy days they often already can barely or just can't fully load an Issaquah 130 and hold the schedule, and it gets worse when the run is busy on both ends. I last saw this happen on Easter weekend on Saturday when Cathlamet left (already 5 minutes late by 11am) with room on board for 10 cars or so and a half full dock. Last summer I saw it on every major holiday and most weekends. In some cases yes they will get more than an Issaquah on board and the wider lanes will allow them to load faster. I'm pretty darn sure it's not going to be that much faster and the regular riders I've talked to about it agree. But we'll have to see, maybe those wider lanes will allow some clever loading. :-) That Mukilteo terminal layout is murder on the schedule.
|
|
|
Post by maximase86 on May 21, 2014 11:03:47 GMT -8
So on the three-boat service suggestion in Mukilteo, why not go the opposite direction and offer three boat service in Bremerton instead?
S
|
|
Koastal Karl
Voyager
Been on every BC Ferry now!!!!!
Posts: 7,747
|
MV Tokitae
May 21, 2014 13:25:23 GMT -8
via mobile
Post by Koastal Karl on May 21, 2014 13:25:23 GMT -8
I thought that crossing was 20 mins?? Should just build a bridge lol!
|
|
|
Post by Blue Bus Fan on May 21, 2014 14:16:13 GMT -8
Maybe WSF is seeing if the Tokitae could work good on the route without rebuilding the Mulkilteo and if she fails they would move her to Bremerton route. If she fails hopefully they start rebuilding the Mulkilteo early and open it early than 2019.
I agree with closing the sun deck during the later fall, winter and early spring. But I would disagree during the later spring, summer and early fall, this is only on the Mulkilteo to Clinton route.
|
|
|
Post by compdude787 on May 21, 2014 14:35:25 GMT -8
Koastal Karl: Umm, no; the channel is too wide to build a bridge across. On another note, it really is a shame that the sundeck will be closed--at least initially--on the Tokitae. I'm sure WSF will open up the sundeck once they get enough crew members trained on this boat. Don't you think that would seem pretty logical? I don't think that the closing of the sundeck is a money-saving move so much as it is a way to reduce the amount of crew required until they've gotten enough people familiarized with this new vessel. I'm sure WSF would much rather have the sundeck closed than have to cancel yet another sailing on their busiest route (in terms of car traffic) due to lack of crew. Steve Rosenow, just be glad that the vessel isn't going to be assigned to Bremerton and you wouldn't be missing out on the sundeck when the vessel goes into service. Once the third olympic class ferry goes into service, you'll enjoy the nice sundeck with enough crew trained for the Olympics that it will be adequately crewed.
|
|