|
Post by Kahn_C on Jun 6, 2017 17:01:11 GMT -8
Looks to me like a gallery deck on the near side. Should be interesting to see how much the final design deviates from the artwork versions.
|
|
|
Post by Curtis on Jun 6, 2017 17:32:54 GMT -8
I echo most of the above comments. The updated design of the Minor 44s is one of the most aesthetically pleasing designs to come from BC Ferries in the last 15 years. I'd go as far to say the design is up there with the Coastals and Northern Expedition. The paint scheme they gave it adds to the sleekness of the design and I personally hope they keep it even though they likely won't. I guess that depends on if they decide to go the Salish Class route and display artwork on the sides. On that note, I wonder if a "Name the Minor 44s" contest might be coming up?
As for the above comments about a gallery deck on one side of the vessel, I wouldn't dismiss it yet as a lot of vehicle deck space is going to be taken up by the passenger lounge on this vessel. Plus a number of similarly designed European vessels (Fjord1 in particular) also have this type of vehicle deck configuration. I am a bit skeptic to it though as this would go against BC Ferries previous statements about having the lounge at vehicle deck level so elevators would not be needed on these vessels.
Whatever the case, exciting times ahead!
|
|
|
Post by Kahn_C on Jun 6, 2017 17:53:23 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by Curtis on Jun 8, 2017 22:14:34 GMT -8
Went searching through Google earlier and came across an article from the website Work Boat with a new picture of Damen's artist render that confirms our suspicions. The Minor 44s will indeed have a gallery deck that goes overtop of the passenger lounge. A smart design choice if I do say so myself. There is also an overhead of the render that shows 3 standard vehicle lanes and a wide commercial vehicle lane. The article itself doesn't really state anything we didn't know already though. www.workboat.com/news/shipbuilding/damen-build-ferries/EDIT: Another article from Damen's Website: www.damen.com/en/news/2017/06/two_damen_ferries_for_british_columbia_canada
|
|
|
Post by Kahn_C on Jun 9, 2017 19:04:41 GMT -8
Went searching through Google earlier and came across an article from the website Work Boat with a new picture of Damen's artist render that confirms our suspicions. The Minor 44s will indeed have a gallery deck that goes overtop of the passenger lounge. A smart design choice if I do say so myself. There is also an overhead of the render that shows 3 standard vehicle lanes and a wide commercial vehicle lane. The article itself doesn't really state anything we didn't know already though. www.workboat.com/news/shipbuilding/damen-build-ferries/EDIT: Another article from Damen's Website: www.damen.com/en/news/2017/06/two_damen_ferries_for_british_columbia_canadaGood find(s). Interesting that the gallery deck looks to be double-laned at the top. These are going to be some neat boats, hopefully we end up with lots of construction pictures to hunt down.
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,175
|
Post by Neil on Jun 9, 2017 21:53:50 GMT -8
Have to say, it really seems weird that they would use a gallery deck- as they are apparently doing one one side- on a vessel that small. I imagine that they've crunched the numbers and have found it more economical than just making the vessel longer, but it seems to me that loading the small number of vehicles that will fit beneath that deck might be awkward and time consuming. Time will tell.
This also looks like a design that is rather overbuilt for the Hornby route, where basically, we just need a new version of Quinitsa, in terms of capacity. On the other hand, these vessels will probably be a serious step up in terms of sea keeping from the Kahloke, which is a big factor for the long season of wild weather that often besets Lambert Channel.
|
|
John H
Voyager
Admin Emeritus
Posts: 2,919
|
Post by John H on Jun 9, 2017 22:07:05 GMT -8
Have to say, it really seems weird that they would use a gallery deck- as they are apparently doing one one side- on a vessel that small. I imagine that they've crunched the numbers and have found it more economical than just making the vessel longer, but it seems to me that loading the small number of vehicles that will fit beneath that deck might be awkward and time consuming. Time will tell. From what people are saying, I think there's going to be a passenger lounge under the gallery deck, and not space for parking cars. And hopefully passengers will have access to the outside of the upper deck where there looks to be some sort of semi-sheltered open-air area.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 10, 2017 7:10:00 GMT -8
This also looks like a design that is rather overbuilt for the Hornby route, where basically, we just need a new version of Quinitsa, in terms of capacity. On the other hand, these vessels will probably be a serious step up in terms of sea keeping from the Kahloke, which is a big factor for the long season of wild weather that often besets Lambert Channel. BC Ferries is not planning to deploy either of these vessels to the Hornby route. The press release from June 6th (http://www.bcferries.com/bcferries/faces/attachments?id=1043829) states; "The first of the new vessels will be deployed on the Powell River – Texada Island route, replacing the 59-year old North Island Princess, which will be retired from the BC Ferries fleet. The second vessel will replace the Quadra Queen II on the Port McNeill – AlertBay – Sointula route. The Quadra Queen II will become a relief vessel, allowing for fleet redeployments and the retirement of the 53-year old Howe Sound Queen."
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Jun 10, 2017 7:36:12 GMT -8
This also looks like a design that is rather overbuilt for the Hornby route, where basically, we just need a new version of Quinitsa, in terms of capacity. On the other hand, these vessels will probably be a serious step up in terms of sea keeping from the Kahloke, which is a big factor for the long season of wild weather that often besets Lambert Channel. BC Ferries is not planning to deploy either of these vessels to the Hornby route. The press release from June 6th (http://www.bcferries.com/bcferries/faces/attachments?id=1043829) states; "The first of the new vessels will be deployed on the Powell River – Texada Island route, replacing the 59-year old North Island Princess, which will be retired from the BC Ferries fleet. The second vessel will replace the Quadra Queen II on the Port McNeill – AlertBay – Sointula route. The Quadra Queen II will become a relief vessel, allowing for fleet redeployments and the retirement of the 53-year old Howe Sound Queen." ....but they hope to build more than just two of the class, eventually. And fleet standardization is a goal, so it's reasonable to assume that ships similar to these first two would eventually find themselves on a variety of routes, either on a permanent or temporary basis.
|
|
|
Post by Kahn_C on Jun 10, 2017 8:15:25 GMT -8
BC Ferries is not planning to deploy either of these vessels to the Hornby route. The press release from June 6th (http://www.bcferries.com/bcferries/faces/attachments?id=1043829) states; "The first of the new vessels will be deployed on the Powell River – Texada Island route, replacing the 59-year old North Island Princess, which will be retired from the BC Ferries fleet. The second vessel will replace the Quadra Queen II on the Port McNeill – AlertBay – Sointula route. The Quadra Queen II will become a relief vessel, allowing for fleet redeployments and the retirement of the 53-year old Howe Sound Queen." ....but they hope to build more than just two of the class, eventually. And fleet standardization is a goal, so it's reasonable to assume that ships similar to these first two would eventually find themselves on a variety of routes, either on a permanent or temporary basis. To quote The New Minor Class Vessels report to the Ferry Commission... (2.2.3):
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,175
|
Post by Neil on Jun 10, 2017 8:17:04 GMT -8
BC Ferries is not planning to deploy either of these vessels to the Hornby route. The press release from June 6th (http://www.bcferries.com/bcferries/faces/attachments?id=1043829) states; "The first of the new vessels will be deployed on the Powell River – Texada Island route, replacing the 59-year old North Island Princess, which will be retired from the BC Ferries fleet. The second vessel will replace the Quadra Queen II on the Port McNeill – AlertBay – Sointula route. The Quadra Queen II will become a relief vessel, allowing for fleet redeployments and the retirement of the 53-year old Howe Sound Queen." ....but they hope to build more than just two of the class, eventually. And fleet standardization is a goal, so it's reasonable to assume that ships similar to these first two would eventually find themselves on a variety of routes, either on a permanent or temporary basis. Mr Horn is right. The plan is indeed to replace all the smallest vessels with this class, including the Kahloke at Hornby. (Kahn_C also posted while I was writing.) Regarding the gallery deck; John is right, at least partly. The passenger lounge would be under the deck. However, it looks like there will be one gallery deck, two lanes wide, and the lounge would probably only be one car lane wide. I'll be interested to see the actual configuration.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 10, 2017 10:40:26 GMT -8
That is correct, they are planning to build more of these ferries. I was only focused on where the first two were being deployed and wasn't thinking further out. Thank you for reminding me.
As for the gallery deck it will be interesting to see how they integrate that with the passenger lounge below it. I would image there will be stairs leading from the gallery deck to the lounge? However, if I remember correctly passengers on the Queen of Capilano have to walk down the gallery deck ramps to get to the main car deck then up the stairs to the lounge? Perhaps, BC Ferries is planning to have them set up that way as well?
It looks to me that there will only be one passenger lounge on gallery deck side? Am I looking at the drawings correctly?
|
|
|
Post by Kahn_C on Jun 10, 2017 10:51:20 GMT -8
That is correct, they are planning to build more of these ferries. I was only focused on where the first two were being deployed and wasn't thinking further out. Thank you for reminding me. As for the gallery deck it will be interesting to see how they integrate that with the passenger lounge below it. I would image there will be stairs leading from the gallery deck to the lounge? However, if I remember correctly passengers on the Queen of Capilano have to walk down the gallery deck ramps to get to the main car deck then up the stairs to the lounge? Perhaps, BC Ferries is planning to have them set up that way as well? It looks to me that there will only be one passenger lounge on gallery deck side? Am I looking at the drawings correctly? My money's on the same access arrangement as the Capilano (as in walking down the ramps, main deck lounge means no stairs). And yah, BC Ferries seems to want a single passenger lounge on one side, it was that way in their original concept drawings too.
|
|
Nick
Voyager
Chief Engineer - Queen of Richmond
Posts: 2,078
|
Post by Nick on Jun 10, 2017 12:53:48 GMT -8
A single passenger lounge means there are fewer spaces to clear in the event of an emergency. Generally, having fewer individual passenger spaces allows the crew count to be smaller for a given passenger capacity.
Overall I like this concept design. A main deck lounge means a mechanically simpler vessel with no elevator required and easier, faster emergency evacuation. It looks like there's a solarium of sorts on the upper deck with outside seating, which will be a nice addition. It also looks like they're finally veering away from the old RAD concept and utilizing the more reliable, more efficient electric pod drives. The renderings look like they're using a similar pod to the Salish class.
I'm also happy they are being somewhat forward-looking with the mention of hybrid propulsion. It will be very possible for these vessels to become completely battery powered within their planned lifetimes. I think at this point the shore side power infrastructure is the weak link, considering these boats will mostly be based from small population centres.
I'm looking forward to seeing the build.
|
|
|
Post by Dane on Jun 10, 2017 16:44:20 GMT -8
....but they hope to build more than just two of the class, eventually. And fleet standardization is a goal, so it's reasonable to assume that ships similar to these first two would eventually find themselves on a variety of routes, either on a permanent or temporary basis. I feel pretty confident that no more of these ferries will be ordered, but here's to hoping I'm a cynic. The C class were the only post-founding ships that get replicated and I suspect that the demands of government contracting at the time were less onerous. I haven't read everything in great detail but does BC Ferries own the design? It does look close to their concept that went out previously. In any event unless there's options, and there isn't here, it's hard to replicate capital purchases.
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,175
|
Post by Neil on Jun 10, 2017 20:37:03 GMT -8
....but they hope to build more than just two of the class, eventually. And fleet standardization is a goal, so it's reasonable to assume that ships similar to these first two would eventually find themselves on a variety of routes, either on a permanent or temporary basis. I feel pretty confident that no more of these ferries will be ordered, but here's to hoping I'm a cynic. The C class were the only post-founding ships that get replicated and I suspect that the demands of government contracting at the time were less onerous. I haven't read everything in great detail but does BC Ferries own the design? It does look close to their concept that went out previously. In any event unless there's options, and there isn't here, it's hard to replicate capital purchases. I'm not clear on where your confidence comes from, since they've stated flat out that this class will replace all the minor vessels, k-class and otherwise. My reservation comes from the fact that these boats are designed to deal with heavier seas, and in Saanich Inlet, the Thetis/Penelakut route, and Hornby most of the time, this design is overkill. I think the focus on standardization and interchangeability can lead to higher costs and a lot of steel where it's not always needed.
|
|
|
Post by Dane on Jun 10, 2017 22:21:02 GMT -8
Because the it's not the first time BC Ferries has dropped the standardization card on something that will be the beginning of more. Most recently the Capilano, Skeena, and Fast Cats were billed as the start of multi-order procurements. None had a second order. The BCFS submission for the Coastals and Salish classes also spoke to standardization and further purchases. Other than occasional optimistic PowerPoint slides there's no meaningful substantive documents to demonstrate BC Ferries has any genuine interest in additional boats of either type.
|
|
|
Post by mybidness459 on Jun 11, 2017 11:17:14 GMT -8
Damen Shipyards have officially won the bid to build the new 44 AEQ minor class ferries. They will be built in Romania. I'd imagine they'll be transported via a heavy lift ship. They'll also be a diesel-electric hybrid vessel. This is actually a nice little design. www.bcferries.com/bcferries/faces/attachments?id=1043829Cool! I like it.😇
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,175
|
Post by Neil on Jun 11, 2017 12:20:52 GMT -8
Because the it's not the first time BC Ferries has dropped the standardization card on something that will be the beginning of more. Most recently the Capilano, Skeena, and Fast Cats were billed as the start of multi-order procurements. None had a second order. The BCFS submission for the Coastals and Salish classes also spoke to standardization and further purchases. Other than occasional optimistic PowerPoint slides there's no meaningful substantive documents to demonstrate BC Ferries has any genuine interest in additional boats of either type. I don't see the point in bringing up examples from a quarter century or more ago. For a long time, BC Ferries had the luxury of deferring newbuilds by squeezing more years out of elderly vessels. They now have a whole slew of vessels that are simply going to have to be replaced, all within the next ten years. They've built three of the Salish class, have signed a contract for two 44s, and have announced a third 100 car class. The regime is different from the era you referenced, and standardization has been part of an increasingly frequent mantra. I expect this time around it will become reality, out of necessity.
|
|
|
Post by Dane on Jun 11, 2017 12:36:00 GMT -8
I outlined above why I think that's out of the realm of possibility with contracting rules. Time will tell I suppose; other than saying standardization there is not actually anything standardized.
|
|
|
Post by Cascadian Transport on Jun 11, 2017 12:36:31 GMT -8
Because the it's not the first time BC Ferries has dropped the standardization card on something that will be the beginning of more. Most recently the Capilano, Skeena, and Fast Cats were billed as the start of multi-order procurements. None had a second order. The BCFS submission for the Coastals and Salish classes also spoke to standardization and further purchases. Other than occasional optimistic PowerPoint slides there's no meaningful substantive documents to demonstrate BC Ferries has any genuine interest in additional boats of either type. I don't see the point in bringing up examples from a quarter century or more ago. For a long time, BC Ferries had the luxury of deferring newbuilds by squeezing more years out of elderly vessels. They now have a whole slew of vessels that are simply going to have to be replaced, all within the next ten years. They've built three of the Salish class, have signed a contract for two 44s, and have announced a third 100 car class. The regime is different from the era you referenced, and standardization has been part of an increasingly frequent mantra. I expect this time around it will become reality, out of necessity. I think it's also worth noting that the Skeena and Fastcats are not good examples of the failings of standardization. The Fastcats were unmitigated disasters- No way would any more boats of that type have been built after that fiasco. The Skeena also had problems in her infancy, and that, coupled with cost overruns from the Fastcats, is ultimately what killed the Century Class Project. As for the Capalano- A modernized version of this boat has, in fact, already been built. It can usually be found sailing across Jervis Inlet fourteen or so times a day. ===== My belief is that BCFerries will move forward with the goal of Standardization. This does not necessarily mean, however, that we will end up with four classes of one hundred percent Identical vessels. For Example, when the time comes to replace the New West and First-generation C's, I believe they will go with "Modernized" Coastals- Vessels about as similar to our Current Coastals as the Capalano is with the Island Sky. If we do this across the entire newbuild program, we will end up with four classes of similar, interchangeable, efficient ships. And that's exactly what the goal is.
|
|
|
Post by Dane on Jun 11, 2017 12:39:29 GMT -8
The Island Sky is not a modernized Capilano class. They sort of look similar and that is it; everything of substance is different. The Fast Cats certainly were a disaster, that does not mitigate the beginning of a "standard" that did not come to pass.
The Skeena project was cancelled strictly for finances, not because of issues with the boats. Nonetheless it is all apart of BC Ferries continued "standardization" of classes that has never happened save perhaps the infancy of the fleet.
|
|
Nick
Voyager
Chief Engineer - Queen of Richmond
Posts: 2,078
|
Post by Nick on Jun 11, 2017 14:14:06 GMT -8
I can see both perspectives here. If this was a purely government contract, subject to government contracting rules, I would completely agree with Dane as there is no way to guarantee a future build will follow the same design. As far as I know though, BCF in its current structure is not subject to contracting rules that are as strict as that.
Also, Damen is a company that has significant experience designing vessels and exporting them to other shipyards for construction. This design could easily be adjusted for construction in virtually any shipyard around the world (including Canada, if we were in any way competitive).
|
|
|
Post by Dane on Jun 11, 2017 17:33:08 GMT -8
BCFS uses Provincial government contracting standards / laws, and the governmental procurement office. Another of the wait-it-isn't-private eccentricities.
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Jun 11, 2017 19:06:19 GMT -8
Keep in mind that most of the issues that we are discussing here and now in June 2017 will later become "shocking and unexpected items" in year 2020 on the various Facebook groups.
To quote a certain ferry protest page, "there hasn't been much mention of this project."
We can be helpful again in 2020.
|
|