|
Post by Ferryman on Feb 6, 2008 20:45:42 GMT -8
Here's a topic we've touched upon a few times in the past, yet I feel the urge to write a proper debate about it in its own designated thread this time.
In 2005, I could remember a new page on the BC Ferries website stating, "BC Ferries is proud to announce that the Queen of Coquitlam will be permanently deployed to the Horseshoe Bay to Langdale Route. The Queen of Coquitam had returned a Mid Life Upgrade in 2003, with a completely redesigned interior that has returned alot of positive remarks as the vessel was serving the Horseshoe Bay to Departure Bay route".
Now, in the fall of 2005, the Queen of Surrey was scheduled to go into her own Mid Life upgrade, which would last until June 2006. All of us on this forum were speculating that it would run in place of the Queen of Cowichan on the Departure Bay to Horseshoe Bay route, that way there could be just a little bit more breathing space on both of the vessels serving the route, seeming the other vessel running on the route was the twin sister, Queen of Oak Bay. The Queen of Oak Bay in my opinion is better to be on during a full sailing, compared to the Queen of Cowichan. Even though they both have the same passenger ratings, there's more seating on the Oak Bay with her slightly larger passenger decks. It makes quite a difference I think. So it would only make sense to have the Queen of Surrey to run in place of the Queen of Cowichan, for the extra breathing space.
Even though I've only been on the Horseshoe Bay to Langdale route a hand full of times, I've always felt that the extra passenger space with the Queen of Surrey is wasted, as alot of vehicular travellers end up staying in their vehicle for the crossing anyway, seeming it's only about a 35 - 40 minute journey, compared to the 1 hour 40 minute crossing on Horseshoe Bay to Departure Bay. Like every route, yes there are times when the Horseshoe Bay to Langdale route is jammed to the rim with people, which 75% of the time is during the summer (the other 25% is during commuter sailings).
So here's a bit of a look into the past, back to the 1980s and 1990s. Once the Queen of Alberni was lifted in 1984, I believe she got to have a go at running the route. But the regular travellers felt that the lack of passenger space was an issue. Which at the time, it really was seeming there was absolutely no passenger deck expansion, which didn't happen until 1986 or so. The Queen of Cowichan was then deployed to the route until 1996, when it seemed to have its name pulled out of a hat for an extensive renovation to the interior. So the Queen of Surrey was deployed to that route, after serving on the Horseshoe Bay to Departure Bay route for the good majority of her life up until that point. From 1996 to 2005, the regulars of the Langdale to Horseshoe Bay litterally fell in love with the Queen of Surrey.
Touching back now on the part where BC Ferries actually released a whole page on their website, on how proud they were to redeploy another vessel to the route instead. Well, the Queen of Coquitlam ended up getting placed on to the route as originally planned as the Queen of Surrey was having her kick at the cat for plastic surgery. Well it wasn't long before members on this board began reporting that the regulars on the route created a huge uproar on how upset they were that the Queen of Surrey wasn't returning to the route after her extensive upgrades. "The 'Coquitlams passenger space is way too small for the demand on the route", is one of the quotes I remember hearing at the time. I tried taking a few trips on the route as the Coquitlam was running at the time to see just how cramped the conditions were at the time. Now after spending many crossings on ALL of the C-Class sisters going back and forth across the Strait of Georgia at least a dozen times a year for my whole life, I know what cramped conditions are like on those Ferries. For the fun of it, I tried a Sunday afternoon sailing, which is traditionally a busy time on all routes. I'll admit, maybe it wasn't the right time to see what it was like, but I felt that the Queen of Coquitlam ran quite comfortably on the route, especially seeming it was half full. But no, the regulars insisted that the Queen of Surrey handles the heavy traffic alot better than the Queen of Coquitlam ever will. So once the Queen of Surrey had completed her Mid Life Upgrade, she was redeployed back to the route she had been on for a decade.
The Queen of Surrey goes in for refit for a month, which will start in the next couple of days I believe. I know the regulars are going to hate every second of having to take the Coquitlam instead of the Surrey during that time. Don't worry Sunshine Coasters, you're beloved Queen of Surrey is going in for annual maintenance and will be back soon (this is normal).
What's everyone elses take on the issue?
|
|
|
Post by Scott on Feb 6, 2008 21:08:29 GMT -8
You make some pretty good points. The little bit of extra space would probably be more appreciated on Route 2. But people sure are loathe to trade something they're used to for something a bit smaller. Does anyone know any other reasons people prefer the Surrey? I don't think the size of the passenger lounge is a good enough reason.
|
|
Koastal Karl
Voyager
Been on every BC Ferry now!!!!!
Posts: 7,747
|
Post by Koastal Karl on Feb 6, 2008 21:18:32 GMT -8
I dont think it is a good enough reason either. The passenger space isent that much less on the Coquitlam than the Surrey. It is only a 40 min crossing. Half the people stay in the cars so what is the big deal with between the Surrey and Coquitlam there isent much difference really.
|
|
|
Post by Hardy on Feb 6, 2008 21:20:32 GMT -8
Let's break out the laser tape measures and go and check all the dimensions on board the two vessels in question. I am sure that the 0.5% additional space will surely be the deciding factor (sarcasm off). Yes, ferry interiors and amenties evolve based on the route they are on. However, local special interest groups should NEVER dictate which vessel runs which route -- they SHOULD have INPUT but never DICTATE. <muttering> Bunch of rotten NIMBYS - think I like riding the Esquimalt on Rte-30? Rather have the Surrey... <muttering>
|
|
|
Post by Nickfro on Feb 6, 2008 22:03:14 GMT -8
My take on it is that the people that regularily travel to and from the Sunshine Coast are just like a BC Ferry crew. . . .they get used to a specific vessel and have a tough time dealing with a different one. Sure I think that a C Class with somewhat larger passenger deck space would be more beneficial to a longer run and larger amounts of foot passengers. However, it's part of reality where a company listens to their prime customers when it comes to making choices, even if it's not the most practical. I ride on Route 3 quite often and there are times (typically Sundays after a weekend trip) where I never leave my vehicle. I have gone on Route 2 way too many times to count and I can't recall more than a couple trips where I have stayed on the car deck for the entire trip. Given that trend of mine, and similar others, this redeployment of the two C Class ships makes sense. My gut feeling doesn't see it happening though, and my reasoning comes from the amounts spent on each vessel's MLU.
|
|
|
Post by DENelson83 on Feb 6, 2008 22:16:48 GMT -8
IMO, the Queen of Oak Bay and Queen of Surrey should always be on route 2. The Queen of Cowichan would do route 3, and the Queen of Coquitlam would be the fill-in boat.
And how come we still don't have a direct Departure Bay-Langdale route?
|
|
|
Post by ferrytraveller on Feb 6, 2008 22:21:24 GMT -8
well it will be interesting to see if they strip the platform decks from the cow and place it as a spare on the various routes
|
|
|
Post by Ferryman on Feb 6, 2008 22:28:03 GMT -8
And how come we still don't have a direct Departure Bay-Langdale route? Because there wouldn't be enough demand?
|
|
|
Post by Nickfro on Feb 6, 2008 22:51:28 GMT -8
I'd like to see them give that route option a try. I would certainly have used it for weekend trips when living in Victoria. Only 1 round trip in a day would meet demand though in my mind.
|
|
|
Post by Retrovision on Feb 6, 2008 23:00:28 GMT -8
Before I comment in jest I'd like to thank you, Chris, for making this (finally, took long enough) a point of contention again "BC Ferries is proud to announce that the Queen of Coquitlam will be permanently deployed to the Horseshoe Bay to Langdale Route...." ...And our war in Afghanistan, started so immediately after 9/11, has so much to do with Iraq, the bringer of 9/11. ...And I've got a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you. The fact is that, like the late 60s were the (recent) time to realize the necessity of compassion in western society and now (finally, to a certain degree) politics (rest in peace, Maharishi Mahesh Yogi), post-2000 is the time to take into critical consideration everything the establishment tells us is true, including the notion of "democracy" itself.
|
|
Quatchi
Voyager
Engineering Officer - CCG
Posts: 930
|
Post by Quatchi on Feb 6, 2008 23:15:06 GMT -8
I think with this issue you have to look at demographics. I don't know exact figures. but I am assuming that route 3 has a more periodic ridership while route 2 has a more sporatic (SP) ridership. What I am saying is that I think more people commute daily on route 3 than 2. Therefore they care a little more about the conditions on the ship. For me if the ship is crammed full and theres nowhere to sit (inside or out) I just live with it, Although I think that if I were to be taking the same ferry every day to get to work I would be a little more enthusiastic about doing something about it. SO should the route 3'rs get their way, NO. Should they have some input, YES. Is this the only reason that the surrey is on route 3 and not 2, I hope BCF isn't that stupid.
My two cents,
|
|
|
Post by Retrovision on Feb 6, 2008 23:21:34 GMT -8
Valid points all, but wasn't part of the sale to us of the conversion of BCFC to BCFS a stepping away from the inherent lies of politics? What have we truly gained, or should I still be asking what we've lost?
|
|
|
Post by Nucksrule on Feb 7, 2008 17:34:31 GMT -8
Seeing as I am a regular on rte3, I may have a little bias towards sunshine coasters, but I still don't see why it is such a big problem. If it is such a small diffference in space to begin with, why is it so important to switch vessels? At times rte 3 can be the busiest rte out of the lower mainland. So although it might be good to give rte 2 the surrey's larger lounge capacity, try to not be so neglectant towards rte 3's users too.
|
|
|
Post by coastalcody on Feb 7, 2008 18:44:24 GMT -8
Okay i am finally going to comment on this. First let me ask you guys a question. Why are you guys all on this website? Im thinking because of your love for ferries. Well seeing as i live in gibsons and take the surrey every where. There isn't much to do. So the ferries are like a part of us. Every one knows in town that our main ferry is the surrey and the normal back up is the esqui. Everyone knows shes a "plunker". The people of the sunshine coast have come to love the surrey for a couple reasons. It's got more space seeing as in the off season it consists mainly of walk on passengers. Second is that we have grown to love this ferry. Personally i think the surrey is the best ferry in the fleet, not just because, but because its great, roomy and i feel like it's a part of me and so does everyone else in gibsons and on the sushine coast. So please take a minute before you say we should think about others. Are you going to just go give your favourite dinosaur as a kid to someone else and probably never see it again. Or maby once get to play with it. Sorry if i came out harsh, but i just thought i should express my opinion and all of the sunshine coast residents well most of them atleast.
|
|
|
Post by Kahloke on Feb 7, 2008 20:21:07 GMT -8
well it will be interesting to see if they strip the platform decks from the cow and place it as a spare on the various routes This issue came up sometime last year in another discussion on this forum. I wish I could remember which thread the comments were posted in, but I remember someone saying something to the effect of it not being economical to remove the gallery decks on the C-Class vessels (ie. Cowichan & Coquitlam), and that there might be weight restrictions associated with loading big rigs on the outer lanes of the main car deck. Is this correct? Does someone remember that conversation better than I do? I think it was brought up because someone had mentioned that the Cowichan and/or Coquitlam might be good long-term replacement vessels on Route 30, with the gallery decks removed for more overheight space. I might be remembering this totally wrong, too.
|
|
|
Post by shipyard on Feb 7, 2008 20:56:45 GMT -8
I believe the structure under the MCD beneath the galleries is insufficient for heavy commercial vehicles.
|
|
|
Post by staffer on Feb 14, 2008 2:01:01 GMT -8
well it will be interesting to see if they strip the platform decks from the cow and place it as a spare on the various routes This issue came up sometime last year in another discussion on this forum. I wish I could remember which thread the comments were posted in, but I remember someone saying something to the effect of it not being economical to remove the gallery decks on the C-Class vessels (ie. Cowichan & Coquitlam), and that there might be weight restrictions associated with loading big rigs on the outer lanes of the main car deck. Is this correct? Does someone remember that conversation better than I do? I think it was brought up because someone had mentioned that the Cowichan and/or Coquitlam might be good long-term replacement vessels on Route 30, with the gallery decks removed for more overheight space. I might be remembering this totally wrong, too. You are correct and I found the post, the discussion to this came up about two months ago on Dec. 20. From Blackshadow's post, These are the Facts: BC Ferries had looked at removing gallery decks but managerment found out the structure for main deck on the outside isn't up to carrying the weight of over height. The cost for these modifations are better spent on new vessels. The approx. cost was report in amount of $25 million plus.Here is the link, ferriesbc.proboards20.com/index.cgi?board=generaltalk&action=display&thread=1184635419&page=5
|
|
|
Post by staffer on Feb 14, 2008 2:34:58 GMT -8
In 2005, I could remember a new page on the BC Ferries website stating, "BC Ferries is proud to announce that the Queen of Coquitlam will be permanently deployed to the Horseshoe Bay to Langdale Route. The Queen of Coquitam had returned a Mid Life Upgrade in 2003, with a completely redesigned interior that has returned alot of positive remarks as the vessel was serving the Horseshoe Bay to Departure Bay route". Now, in the fall of 2005, the Queen of Surrey was scheduled to go into her own Mid Life upgrade, which would last until June 2006. All of us on this forum were speculating that it would run in place of the Queen of Cowichan on the Departure Bay to Horseshoe Bay route, that way there could be just a little bit more breathing space on both of the vessels serving the route, seeming the other vessel running on the route was the twin sister, Queen of Oak Bay. The Queen of Oak Bay in my opinion is better to be on during a full sailing, compared to the Queen of Cowichan. Even though they both have the same passenger ratings, there's more seating on the Oak Bay with her slightly larger passenger decks. It makes quite a difference I think. So it would only make sense to have the Queen of Surrey to run in place of the Queen of Cowichan, for the extra breathing space. What's everyone elses take on the issue? Yes, great post there ferryman. The complaints came fast and furious when this happened and we at Fort Street were caught off guard by everyone's affection for the Surrey on route 3. Some passengers even sent us unofficial polls of which ferry Sunshine Coast residents would want if the Surrey was not coming back. That choice was the Oak Bay. The other three C class ships were tied for the last three choices. People just like the way the Surrey and Oak Bay are designed. Just so you know, the Alberni did have a second go around on route 3 back when the Surrey was in mid-life refit. When the Coquitlam went for its annual refit, the Alberni went there to the delight of many truckers and RV driver and other overheights. Those vehicle drivers wanted the ship to stay until the summer season but, even on regular weekends there were waits for underheights because of the lack of gallery decks. Regular commuters soon started complaining as well.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 17, 2008 18:27:21 GMT -8
I'm happy I'm not the only one on Route 3 who loves the Surrey. She's a really good fit for us and has been for the last dozen years. We need the extra passenger seating space, the larger cafeteria, the larger gift shop, her many work stations and her three elevators! For better or worse, many or us eat our breakfasts in her cafeteria, meet our neighbours and friends in her lounges, buy our papers and magazines in her gift shop and travel with our large suitcases on her elevators. Her work stations are almost always full (on the Surrey, each work station has it's own lighting - the Coquitlam has fewer stations and no lighting) You can count on her to be busy for most of the day apart from the middle and the very end seven days a week. We are getting busier all the time. Is she too large for us, is her space wasted on us? I don't think so. If we didn't need her, we wouldn't have her. If it doesn't matter to anyone else, why not keep a ship on the route where she is most loved & looked after. I'm sure Route 2 would benefit from her larger passenger capacity too, and having the two sisters run together has it's appeal. But when the Coastal Renaissance starts sailing on Route 2, those traveling to/from the island will get their extra space and updated amenities. On Route 3, we will not be asking for the new & brightest ship. We'll be happy with the one we have.
|
|
|
Post by Ferryman on Feb 17, 2008 18:36:45 GMT -8
Great to see you back, mvqoscc. I actually agree with you, with the fact that she is well kept on Route 3. It does show that there is quite some pride with the crew. Now it won't be an issue with the Queen of Surrey being on route 3, with the arrival of the Coastal Renaissance to run in place of the Queen of Cowichan. The attention will now shift to be focused on the Queen of Oak Bay/Coastal Inspiration .
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Feb 17, 2008 18:57:43 GMT -8
(I think this post got posted into the wrong category by mistake, so I've quoted it & copied it here). ============================ When Captain Lloyd is on the bridge, I've seen crew members washing the walls on the sundeck. I wish there was something we could do about the grafitti though. It drives me nuts.
Has anyone else noticed it on other ships? It's a recent development on the Surrey.
Thanks Chris...
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Feb 17, 2008 19:06:23 GMT -8
When Capt. Lloyd is on the bridge, and the crew is washing walls, are the crew-members wearing crash-helmets?
Sorry, I just had to ask..... ;D
|
|
|
Post by Ferryman on Feb 17, 2008 19:16:29 GMT -8
[sarcasm] Ok, I took a trip on the Queen of Surrey last Sunday afternoon on Route 3, and also took a trip on the Queen of Coquitlam today (Also a Sunday afternoon). Here are the cramped conditions onboard that I saw. Queen of Surrey: Queen of Coquitlam [/sarcasm] Heh, I couldn't resist. Those photos were actually taken a long time ago, and I was acting as a stowaway once the Ferry arrived at Langdale. These were the days before you had to disembark and grab a free boarding pass.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 17, 2008 19:19:40 GMT -8
;D (Insert laugh track here)
No crash helmets, but docking is always an adventure.
Ping - Pong, Ping - Pong against the wingwalls!
...And then that horrible scraping noise!
|
|
|
Post by ferryfanyvr on Feb 18, 2008 11:31:56 GMT -8
Hey there...just joined today after a non ferry-geek friend advised me of this site. I've enjoyed riding the ferries since I was a kid and my best friend work has worked as a cook on various routes for the past 10 years so I do get a bit of inside info. FYI my favorite ship is the Coquitam....I know, a lot of people don't like her but sometimes you develop a bit of an emotional attachment to a particular ship and that is the case with me and the "Coco"
Anyway, re: the Cowichan's facelift back in 1996.....her name wasn't exactly just pulled out of a hat. This is what various crewmembers told me at the time: As we all remember, the escalators on the Coq and the Cow (and to a lesser extent, the Alberni) caused many safety concerns in their lifetime. Apparently there was an incident on the Cowichan when she was on route 3 where a youngster was involved in a rather unpleasant accident on one of the escalators. Since the route 3 vessel does 16 sailings a day compared to 8 trips by the route 2 ship there were twice as many chances for this to happen again while passengers were moving between decks at the beginning and end of each sailing, therefore, the "escalator-less" Surrey was deployed to route 3. To appease the route 2 travelling public, the Cowichan received her first makeover to make up for Departure Bay losing the Surrey. As well, the Cowichan was given a bank of video monitors in the chief steward's office so a member of the catering crew could watch over the goings on as people used the escalators. They would hit the red emergency stop button should any problems arise. (Remember the phrase "escalator monitor" being announced over the PA system toward the end of each sailing to summon the CA to the video monitors?) I believe the escalators on the Coquitlam and Alberni were monitored from the engine room. At this time I asked some crewmembers why the escalators weren't simply removed from the ships and was told that they formed a vital part of the ships' structure and it would not be possible. Hmmmmmm...how things change!
|
|