|
|
Post by Ferryman on Jun 16, 2009 21:51:59 GMT -8
Since she's been dubbed the mule of the fleet now that the Queen of Esquimalt is gone, she's really starting to show the fact that she is a mule now. She sat at Departure Bay for about 3 weeks this month, while she was put on standby while the Queen of Cowichan was undergoing some sort of repair. While she was at Departure Bay, I started to study her structure while awaiting Departures on my weekly commutes. So I'm trying to figure out what she hit, to cause some pretty good scrapes down along the Starboard side. Here are some of them.   Now she's been moved to Deas to repair some sort of boiler issues. They've also tarped off the pickle fork decks for refurbishmment as well. I don't have any photos of this though. |
|
|
|
Post by Dane on Jun 16, 2009 23:11:59 GMT -8
Is the Cow back up now? There is pretty predictable MD's on the Rte 2/3 "open triangle" on Sundays now.
|
|
|
|
Post by ferryfanyvr on Jun 17, 2009 18:26:42 GMT -8
The Cowichan did a rte 2/3 triangle this past Sunday and I believe a single rte 2 round trip on Friday. I agree, I'm sure there'll be MD sailings every Fri and Sun now until the summer schedule kicks in. I'm glad the Coquitlam is getting some kind of attention paid to her at Deas right now. I hated the thought of her being left alone and ignored at Langdale until June 30th!
|
|
|
|
Post by ferryfanyvr on Jun 27, 2009 7:12:59 GMT -8
I know that half the amount of $ was put into the Coquitlam's MLU compared to the other c-class, but I was wondering what they DIDN'T spend money on compared to, say, the Cowichan. To the naked eye there's not much of a difference between the two. Does anyone know of any specifics?
Also, a friend has given me some photos to post here taken of the Coco when she was in the middle of being torn apart during her MLU, and I have some I took when I got to go on her about 3 weeks before she re-entered service. As soon as I get around to scanning them I'll post them in the Historical Photos section
|
|
|
|
Post by Mike C on Jun 27, 2009 12:14:23 GMT -8
I know that half the amount of $ was put into the Coquitlam's MLU compared to the other c-class, but I was wondering what they DIDN'T spend money on compared to, say, the Cowichan. To the naked eye there's not much of a difference between the two. Does anyone know of any specifics? They spent only $18.5 million on the Coquitlam, since I think she was more of a "test subject" for the MLU process. I believe they neglected painting the sun decks and didn't replace any exterior deck plating, hence why she's in such bad shape now. All around I would say BC Ferries just "cheaped out" on random stuff, I'm sure Nikonian D60 knows much more about the specifics in that regard. Hopefully they can get this lemon fixed before the start of the REAL summer season... summer just wouldn't be the same without the notorious Queen of Coquitlam breakdowns, as she runs an hour and a half late on Labour Day weekend...  |
|
|
|
Post by Dane on Jun 27, 2009 12:57:13 GMT -8
They spent only $18.5 million on the Coquitlam, since I think she was more of a "test subject" for the MLU process. I believe they neglected painting the sun decks and didn't replace any exterior deck plating, hence why she's in such bad shape now. All around I would say BC Ferries just "cheaped out" on random stuff, I'm sure Nikonian D60 knows much more about the specifics in that regard. Not so much a test subject, she was tendered by the BCFC before the era of false-privitization began. The remainder were private BCFS jobs that had new specifications. Perhaps one of the larger myths among our ferry community is that the "West Coast Interior" is something the private side of BC Ferries created, when in fact they did not. |
|
|
|
Post by Ferryman on Jun 27, 2009 19:40:36 GMT -8
I'm actually a little PO'd at myself. I was on the 9:00pm Renaissance from HSB last night, and I'm thinking I would have likely seen the Queen of Coquitlam en route to Langdale. But I decided to ignore my surroundings for the entire sailing, while I found myself a hiding spot on the HSB end of Deck 5 to avoid the crowds.
I was in the bridge of the Coquitlam back in April, and the bridge interior is still more or less original from being built. Dogwood carpet, and retro green bridge console, much like that of the V-Class. I don't believe the sundeck steel plating was ever replaced, since it's all pitted, and collects water in various areas whenever it rains. I can remember when she was undergoing the refit, they never put the rusty coloured paint all over the superstructure like they ended up doing with the remaining C's, and New West. She just sat alongside the dock, and more or less had the expo stripes painted over a few weeks before she was released back into service. I don't know if any of the machinery below decks recieved alot of work, besides annual servicing. Originally they didn't have the up to date fire windows on the passenger deck, below the davits. They had left the windows with the two vertical bars coming down the windows in, which were classed as fire windows. But after the summer of 2003, they pulled her back out of service to have those windows plated over with steel, and Transport Canada had to make them re-install the davit launched rafts for Pregnant women, and the elderly. It was a pain to be stuck sitting beside the blank walls, where there was once windows. Thankfully a year later, they discovered the beer google fire windows, which were revealed when the Cowichan returned from the upgrade. The Coquitlam was upgraded shortly after. So I'd imagine little modifications over the next couple of years after the refit brings her refit cost closer to the Cowichans refit price.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ferryman on Jul 4, 2009 21:18:49 GMT -8
I was aboard the 2:30pm sailing aboard the Queen of Cowichan from Horseshoe Bay this afternoon. I must say though, that I'm quite impressed that the Cowichan has been given a thurough cleaning over the month of June. I was on the Cowichan during the May long weekend, and she was filthy. Today, her interior was very clean, and the outer decks have been refurbished. The paint fumes are even nice and fresh on the outer decks still.   However, crew only areas still remain untouched   Bonus photo: The only real feature I like about this set of C-Class, and that's the pickle fork decks. I wish the pickle forks on the Super C's were able to be open during the day. They would be a popular feature in the summer.  I love the summer. Being on the outer decks is alot more enjoyable. Let's take a look back to 7 months ago, on December 14th, aboard the Cowichan on a frigid white morning. Same location and angle as the photo above. Enjoy the summer everyone!!  |
|
Mirrlees
Voyager 
Bathtub!
Deck Engineer- Queen of Richmond
Posts: 1,013
|
Post by Mirrlees on Jul 5, 2009 21:20:02 GMT -8
Nice to see that the Cowichan is getting some T.L.C.  |
|
|
|
Post by Ferryman on Aug 1, 2009 18:31:24 GMT -8
I was on the Cowichan this afternoon for my commute home from Squamish. Very crammed, and very frustrating to put up with sailing to say the least. Anyone have any idea what happened to this window? It's on the Port Side of the #1 end, but is on the outside deck covered area on the pickle fork deck, beside the skywalk access.  |
|
|
|
Post by hwy19man on Aug 16, 2009 15:58:10 GMT -8
Since she's been dubbed the mule of the fleet now that the Queen of Esquimalt is gone, she's really starting to show the fact that she is a mule now. [/i] |
|
|
|
Post by lmtengs on Oct 21, 2009 20:15:53 GMT -8
Here's a Queen of Cowichan postcard from about two years ago.  |
|
|
|
Post by ferryfanyvr on Oct 21, 2009 20:44:06 GMT -8
Here's a Queen of Cowichan postcard from about two years ago. Looks like this photo was taken in Departure Bay while she was in the middle of doing an end-for-end turn.....probably due to the infamous C-class clutch problems. EDIT.............I just realized I don't see any passengers or vehicles on board so perhaps she wasn't in service at the time. |
|
|
|
Post by lmtengs on Oct 21, 2009 20:52:04 GMT -8
Here's a Queen of Cowichan postcard from about two years ago. Looks like this photo was taken in Departure Bay while she was in the middle of doing an end-for-end turn.....probably due to the infamous C-class clutch problems. EDIT.............I just realized I don't see any passengers or vehicles on board so perhaps she wasn't in service at the time. It is surely in Departure Bay. You can tell from the "skyline" of houses in behind. |
|
|
|
Post by Ferryman on Oct 21, 2009 21:38:37 GMT -8
This photo showed up on the BCF website, on the Cowichans profile just shortly after she returned to service from her MLU. I've suspected that she was returning to her home port from the refit that day, and approached the dock with the the bow facing the wrong way. Also gave them a chance to show her off in her nice and sparkly white paint. ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by johnsn on Apr 24, 2010 13:41:00 GMT -8
Greetings, I'm new here, and I hope this message is in the right thread. I Googled for more info on the below situation, and finding none, I thought I might get some info here. My car was nearly the last aboard Queen of Coquitlam on the 3pm sailing from Horseshoe Bay to Nanaimo on Friday April 23. We were in the covered waiting area two minutes to departure about eight cars back from front of boarding line when our line was paused and the ramp gate went down. Then a minute or two passed, the gate went up, and the ten car grouping I was in was waved aboard. I was directed to starboard side, deck 3 I believe it was, up a short ramp. Looking in my rear view mirror, I was surprised that when we departed just a few minutes later, there was lots of empty space behind me for more cars, (I'm guessing 30 cars more all told including the other side and the back of the main deck with trucks) but lots of cars were left behind on the dock. mobile.bcferries.com was reporting my trip 100% full as of 2:15pm. Once underway I inquired of several crew about this empty space, and I was informed by one seemingly knowledgable that within the past week or so a new rule had been instituted on freeboard required, which is monitored during loading on the bridge. When the limit is reached, no more vehicles are to be loaded. The crewman -- who seemed to be an officer -- said the ship was designed to fill with vehicles (assuming no trucks with gold ingots or pig iron) before running out of weight capacity, but something had changed. Anybody got more info on this? Seems like a potentially serious capacity reduction for the summer season if it continues. |
|
|
|
Post by lmtengs on Apr 24, 2010 14:36:14 GMT -8
Greetings, I'm new here, and I hope this message is in the right thread. I Googled for more info on the below situation, and finding none, I thought I might get some info here. My car was nearly the last aboard Queen of Coquitlam on the 3pm sailing from Horseshoe Bay to Nanaimo on Friday April 23. We were in the covered waiting area two minutes to departure about eight cars back from front of boarding line when our line was paused and the ramp gate went down. Then a minute or two passed, the gate went up, and the ten car grouping I was in was waved aboard. I was directed to starboard side, deck 3 I believe it was, up a short ramp. Looking in my rear view mirror, I was surprised that when we departed just a few minutes later, there was lots of empty space behind me for more cars, (I'm guessing 30 cars more all told including the other side and the back of the main deck with trucks) but lots of cars were left behind on the dock. mobile.bcferries.com was reporting my trip 100% full as of 2:15pm. Once underway I inquired of several crew about this empty space, and I was informed by one seemingly knowledgable that within the past week or so a new rule had been instituted on freeboard required, which is monitored during loading on the bridge. When the limit is reached, no more vehicles are to be loaded. The crewman -- who seemed to be an officer -- said the ship was designed to fill with vehicles (assuming no trucks with gold ingots or pig iron) before running out of weight capacity, but something had changed. Anybody got more info on this? Seems like a potentially serious capacity reduction for the summer season if it continues. It COULD be that there were three or four tanker trucks full of oil or some other heavy liquid that made the ferry weigh too much to carry anymore cars... I'm not an expert in that topic, but that's my un-educated opinion. |
|
|
|
Post by johnsn on Apr 24, 2010 16:40:49 GMT -8
The crewmember implied that this concern for freeboard on the Queen of Coquitlam and reduced loading was showing up on every trip. I didn't completely document the truck load, but I don't recall seeing any tankers. There was a load of wooden utility poles further back on the truck deck than the picture shows, and there was a Greyhound bus forward on this deck, not in view. Attachments:
|
|
|
|
Post by ferryfanyvr on Apr 24, 2010 17:44:36 GMT -8
The same thing happened when I rode the Coquitlam between Horseshoe Bay and Langdale a few weeks ago...cars were left behind when there was space remaining on the car deck. There weren't many foot passengers so the passenger limit wasn't reached. A crew member told me the ship was sitting too low in the water and couldn't take any more weight. I commented that over the years I had seen the Coquitlam and her sisters carrying full and very heavy loads without such a problem and was told the Coquitlam would have this restriction until her scheduled drydocking this fall.
I DO remember the same situation occurring with the Queen of Oak Bay about 10 years ago and being told she would be back to normal after her drydocking that season...and that's exactly what happened.
|
|
|
|
Post by lmtengs on Apr 25, 2010 9:25:20 GMT -8
So, would that mean that something happened, like a collision that damaged her hull, or are they just waiting so long between drydocks that it's actually a safety risk just to drive your car on to the ship??
|
|
|
|
Post by ferryfanyvr on Apr 25, 2010 10:26:50 GMT -8
It's times like this I wish I knew more about what goes on below the car deck. Back when this happened to the Oak Bay (it may have been even longer that 10 years ago now that I think about it) the crew said something about some kind of "tanks" needing to be "cleaned out" and until that was done, the vessel was carrying a lot of extra weight. I'm hoping to take a trip on the Coquitlam tomorrow so I'll see what I can find out then.
|
|
|
|
Post by fargowolf on Apr 25, 2010 10:59:53 GMT -8
I wonder if it's another "You have to have X number of crew, for X number of passenger thing." like what happened on the Westview/Comox run.
|
|
|
|
Post by ferryfanyvr on Apr 25, 2010 12:28:39 GMT -8
I don't think it's a crew licensing issue. It seems to be exclusively about how low the vessel is sitting in the water. Of course when I ask the crew questions concerning things like this, they usually answer with the least amount if information which they think will satisfy the average passenger. Of course none of us here are "average passengers". If you keep pressing for more info they get suspicious which is understandable in this day and age. 10 or 20 years ago when I would go for a boat ride a couple times a week, many crewmembers knew me and would be very forthcoming with details. Unfortunately many of those crew have either moved on or retired so I don't really know many of them any more. Again, we'll see what I can find out tomorrow.
EDIT: Change of plans and will not be riding the Coquitlam after all. Planning to re-schedule for Sunday May2.
|
|
|
|
Post by ferryfanyvr on May 2, 2010 22:36:53 GMT -8
Went for a round trip today on the 2 sisters...the Cowichan at 1230 from HSB and the Coquitlam at 1700 from DB. The Cowichan was full, leaving traffic behind at HSB. On the way over, I asked a deckhand how often the Cowichan reached her maximum weight ie: her draft limit where she would have to leave traffic behind even though there was empty deck space. I was told it was a very rare occurence.
On the Coquitlam's sailing from DB at 1700 we left much traffic behind even though there was probably room for 30 or so more cars on the gallery and main decks. I told the deck crew what I'd been hearing lately about the Coquitlam reaching her draft limits and asked why. He said no one knows why!! It's just that when the water line reaches a certain draft mark on the hull, they can't take any more weight which has been happening on about 6 out of every 10 sailings since the Coq has been replacing the Oak Bay. He said there are a few rumours floating around such as when the escalators were removed all the concrete that had to be poured to form the stairs added to the weight of the ship. He admitted, though, that the modification had been done several years ago and hadn't made a difference before now. Plus the Cowichan had the same modification made without the same result. As well the Cowichan already sails with a higher empty weight since she has the additional upstairs washrooms at #1 end.
The deckhand also told me that the draft marks might have recently been changed on the Coquitlam and he had heard the Oak Bay might return to service after her refit with the same changes although that was also just a rumour.
So really....no specific answers. It will be interesting to see what happens when the Coquitlam returns to service after her drydocking this fall. As I said earlier I have seen this same situation happen with other C-class vessels over the last 25 years or so and it seems to get rectified eventually.
|
|
Quatchi
Voyager
Engineering Officer - CCG
Posts: 930
|
Post by Quatchi on May 2, 2010 22:50:44 GMT -8
I was on Cowichans 1500 from DP and she was FULL. Absolutely crammed with cars and a couple of big trucks.
Not a lot of walk ons though, maybe 100.
Also, I highly, Highly doubt that the escalators were replaced with concrete stairs. They are steel. Concrete is way to heavy and will crack a tone in a situation like that in a ship.
Cheers,
|
|
