|
|
Post by Curtis on Sept 25, 2004 15:46:31 GMT -8
Heres a strange idea what if they made a 2 car deck BC Ferry that could carry trucks on the second deck as well as the first ain't that Wierd  . |
|
|
|
Post by Ian on Sept 25, 2004 16:38:07 GMT -8
You would need extremly heavy dut bulk heads on each sides and the middle. A bigger problem would be the center of gravity would be higher makeing it tippy, unless the top of the ferry was made of aluminum. On cruise ships the top decks are aluminum rather than steel and they have stabilizers under the water that jet out like wings.
|
|
Doug
Voyager 
Lurking within...the car deck.
Posts: 2,213
|
Post by Doug on Sept 25, 2004 20:48:24 GMT -8
The New Westminster's upper vehicle deck is meant to park higher vehicles than a typical upper vehicle deck, but not quite as high as the lower vehicle deck. That makes the New Westminster the highest vessel in the fleet. The Queen of the North, Queen of Prince Rupert and I think the Queen of Chilliwack all have stabilisers as well.
|
|
Koastal Karl
Voyager
Been on every BC Ferry now!!!!!
Posts: 7,747
|
Post by Koastal Karl on Sept 25, 2004 21:28:42 GMT -8
hmm, New West, if I am correct wouldent the SOBC and the SOVI be the highest as they are much bigger?? I think maybe the New West is the highest out of the V and Burnaby class. But if you are meaning highest upper vehicle deck then yeah the New West would be.
|
|
|
|
Post by NMcKay on Sept 25, 2004 22:05:46 GMT -8
the alberni would be the best candidate, because of the small amount of superstructure. replace it with aluminum, and get Cat 350c LNG engines.
|
|
Doug
Voyager
Lurking within...the car deck.
Posts: 2,213
|
Post by Doug on Sept 25, 2004 23:37:21 GMT -8
The "S" Class vessels may be higher, only due to the higher sixth deck. They have a higher sixth deck than any other vessel in the fleet, but I doubt that small difference is outpowers the New Westminster's upper vehicle deck. You can clearly see that it's almost the height of the lower vehicle deck in the pictures.
|
|
|
|
Post by NMcKay on Sept 26, 2004 0:57:22 GMT -8
yeah. but you dont want your ship to wastee stuff on useless superstructure
|
|
Koastal Karl
Voyager
Been on every BC Ferry now!!!!!
Posts: 7,747
|
Post by Koastal Karl on Sept 26, 2004 8:40:26 GMT -8
I would like to know then why the Queen of Alberni dosent have a higher upper vehicle deck than the rest of the C class???
|
|
|
|
Post by NMcKay on Sept 26, 2004 11:25:55 GMT -8
because the ship didn't have the capacity to hold 115 trucks. if they did the bottom level would be full of water
|
|
|
|
Post by Dane on Sept 27, 2004 17:38:51 GMT -8
I would like to know then why the Queen of Alberni dosent have a higher upper vehicle deck than the rest of the C class??? It was not lifted for trucks. It was lifted to accomodate the extra family vehicle traffic on the Horshoe Bay-Langdlae route after the fall-out of truck traffic (commercial/economic downturn) |
|
|
|
Post by BrianWilliams on Sept 30, 2004 0:50:43 GMT -8
Truck only ferries? Oh. We already have 'em.
Tilbury (South Delta) loads trailers for Sidney twice daily. If I had my 'druthers, BC Ferries would stop hauling commercial traffic altogether.
At least at peak tourist time. And price the big trucks high enough to make BCF an option only because of its frequent service.
40 cubic metres of gravel won't rot. 300-lbs of strawberries might be more sensitive to delay. So pay up, strawberry man. But we won't take your space for gravel.
|
|
.
