|
Post by Name Omitted on Jan 11, 2011 16:35:52 GMT -8
It's amazing. We can spend $50 million building a ship, but we can't figure out how to prepare a site worthy of a LANDING CRAFT. Seriously, how hard can that part of the project be? Did we not have enough time to plan for it, or what? We've know this was coming for how long?
|
|
|
Post by Name Omitted on Jan 2, 2011 10:14:01 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by Name Omitted on Dec 30, 2010 9:50:01 GMT -8
So, I guess the cars load on via that silver boxy thing, then it lifts like an elevator up into the main superstructure of the ship, then it leaves? Sort of. The center barge comes in to add a third hull to the ship, and raise the other two hulls out of the water for shallow water operations. Once the vessel is out of the shallows, the center barge comes up, it no longer displaces water, and the ship operates on her more hydrodynamic two outer hulls. The construction of Susitna was paid for by the US Navy to investigate the possibility of high speed landing craft.
|
|
|
Post by Name Omitted on Dec 21, 2010 16:54:22 GMT -8
So keeping with this information, if a vessel were to snag a rock, would repair work be based of frame numbers from the #1 bow than? Further, if the master wanted to mark in the log a sound from one portion of the craft, would he use only the #1 bow as the reference point, or would he use current direction?
|
|
|
Post by Name Omitted on Dec 20, 2010 6:38:14 GMT -8
Many of the AMHS vessels had deflectors added which, while the ship is under way, creates an updraft that pulls exhaust away from the after-decks.
If you look at the QE2, the base of her funnel actually has a scoop that picks up air from forward motion, and shoots it vertically up the sides of the funnel, picking up fumes as it goes. I don't know if it's architectural Schick or not, but they repeated the process with the QM2 as well.
|
|
|
Post by Name Omitted on Dec 18, 2010 19:14:48 GMT -8
To be honest every vessel to serve the Prince William Sound area has had to run for shelter several times each winter, the only exception being the Kennicott. Not a supprise to me. I've been on the Kennicott across the gulf in better than 20 foot seas. She handles weather well. None of the conventional hulls can do the narrows in and out of Sitka on a running tide (the fast ferries can). Most of our ferries, if they miss slack tide, get a further 6 hours off of their schedule. Kennicott just heads south on the outside of Baranoff Island. She's ugly, but she IS capable.
|
|
|
Post by Name Omitted on Dec 15, 2010 7:48:27 GMT -8
There is a constant discussion (which occasionally gets beyond simple discussion and on to spending money investigating) extending the continental rail system north from Hazelton to Alaska via Carmacks, where a spur would head south to either Haines or (probably more likely since it would pass through Whitehorse) Skagway (on a standard gauge, either bypassing or supplanting the White Pass and Yukon narrow gauge).
|
|
|
Post by Name Omitted on Dec 14, 2010 23:48:35 GMT -8
That would be fun actually to have a boat and get different views like that of the ferries. I got a VERY close view of the M/V Taku (AMHS, one of our Spauldings) coming up Neva Strait. I was, er... probably heading home a bit to fast, and she DID warn me over VHF, but I was sure she was talking to another unidentified small craft. Came around out of St. Johns, and there she was, in all her glory, and I was the idiot in the channel in front of her. Man, she was beautiful, but man, I don't ever want to see her that close while under way again. About a month later, I was in her forward observation lounge going down the Wrangell Narrows (something like 60 aids to navigation in 22 miles) when I saw someone fishing in a lund in the middle of the channel. Taku blew her horn, and the two fishermen were unable to get their engine started. I have never seen such frantic rowing in my life. I'm guessing they got a magnificent view as well.
|
|
|
Post by Name Omitted on Dec 14, 2010 9:37:09 GMT -8
Thank you all very much.
Has there been any discussion about experimenting with mermaid pods or Voith Schneider propellers?
|
|
|
Post by Name Omitted on Dec 14, 2010 9:24:44 GMT -8
The Alaska Railroad links to the continental rail system through two maritime links. The in-house system is Alaska Rail Marine, and it connects Whitter with Seattle weekly.
The CN operates the Aqua Train, connecting Whitter with Prince Rupert.
I believe that both are tug and barge, I am not certain.
The White Pass and Yukon have a landing that is not far from the northern ferry terminus in Skagway. The birth they used to unload train cargo onto a ship from is next to the ferry terminal. Interesting point, this port was the first to utilize rail-ship containers, using the Clifford J. Rodgers to transport containers from Whitehorse to Vancouver.
I once was late for the ferry because I was offered a ride in the engine, but had to run back in time to grab the ship. I was on an injured foot at the time, but could not pass that up. It's amazing how fast the Mat's horn can make a boy run.
|
|
|
Post by Name Omitted on Dec 13, 2010 22:07:21 GMT -8
I've spent a lot of time on the Alaska Marine Highway, where we spend more time sailing than loading/unloading, so don't do much with double-enders, so here comes the 10 year old style stream of questions.
From a mechanical perspective, is there a true bow? Does the running crew migrate to one or the other bridge for long haul work? Below decks, is there one engine that drives shafts in either direction through a gear box? Is there a rudder on each side, and does the "bow" just lock into place, or is it used for steering as well? What sort of efficiency loss is there to such a design?
I assume Starboard and Port are relative to the ships current direction, and there are simply 2 sets of running lights, but inside the vessel, how are passenger signs notated (as in, which direction to the galley?)
|
|
|
Post by Name Omitted on Dec 9, 2010 19:31:44 GMT -8
That would be great, thanks!
|
|
|
Post by Name Omitted on Dec 8, 2010 22:34:35 GMT -8
I caught the first post on this thread, which is what has me so fascinated. We stretched our Mat, Mal and Tusty, but that did not change the essential nature of the hull. This is, well, it probably shows my ignorance, but I have never run across this sort of retrofit before... and I've SEEN her. I have pictures I took as a child, having been thoroughly fascinated (she was the first cat car ferry I had ever seen). I guess now, 20 years later, I simply have a new reason to be completely fascinated by her.
So… how does she handle compared to a design built cat? That she is still in service is obvious testament the engineering that went into the build. Is there any chance that someone has the body plan of the hull form?
|
|
|
Post by Name Omitted on Dec 8, 2010 11:50:28 GMT -8
Her bow view real-estate is taken up by private cabins and a playground full of kids who could not care less about the view?
|
|
|
Post by Name Omitted on Dec 8, 2010 11:35:58 GMT -8
I have to ask for more information about her. Turning a monohull into a cat? Doubling her capacity? What's the story here? Was there money in the "repair and upgrade" budget that was not in the "new build" budget? That extensive of work, it would seem cheaper to start from scratch!
|
|