|
|
Post by Mac Write on Aug 30, 2007 9:58:28 GMT -8
bpawlett wrote in the Vessel Placement thread
Would it be worth spending the $15M/per ship (Saanich and Vancouver) and even feasible/possible to extend the life of these ships 10 more years like the Queen of Naniamo had done (she was due to be retired in 2006, but got a re-preve with a $13.5M upgrade in fall of 2006). This would give BCFC 2 more ships. The question is, is $30-$50M for 2 ship for 10 years of service worth it, or are the Saanich and Vancouver so costly to refit for another 10 years of service that it's too expensive (though $50M for the New West seems $$$$ since she has only 10-15 left in her).
|
|
|
|
Post by Curtis on Aug 30, 2007 10:02:54 GMT -8
I'd think that the only reason they'd keep the V Class Vessels for a few more years would only be if they needed an extra vessel.
|
|
|
|
Post by Nucksrule on Aug 30, 2007 12:33:46 GMT -8
maybe not a complete mlu, but possibly just a fix to keep em going a few more years
|
|
|
|
Post by Retrovision on Aug 30, 2007 12:36:39 GMT -8
Surprisingly enough there are rumours that have the 'Saanich placed at Langdale taking-on 'Esquimalt duties before retirement.
|
|
|
|
Post by bpawlett on Aug 30, 2007 12:53:45 GMT -8
keeping one of the v's for a few years would probably give them some breathing room, traffic is only going to get busier, the 2010
games around the corner as well, BC will be a busy place for a while, I tell ya MLU the SAANICH amd run her on the langdale for a while.
|
|
|
|
Post by Political Incorrectness on Aug 30, 2007 12:56:41 GMT -8
The Saanich already had a refit in 1990, you might as well just let the Van go and and leave the New West and saanich.
|
|
|
|
Post by Nucksrule on Aug 30, 2007 13:05:53 GMT -8
Heck, just to have a spare ferry would be great help on long weekends. keep the saanich as a spare, put the new west on tsa-swb with the new coastals filling in for the vancouver (sell or scrap it) and the new west's old spot on route 30
|
|
|
|
Post by hwy19man on Aug 30, 2007 13:14:50 GMT -8
Even on this board, the idea was that the Q of Vancouver would midlifed and then based at Langdale. Besides two spares would be beneficial for summer and long weekends.
|
|
|
|
Post by Retrovision on Aug 30, 2007 18:07:35 GMT -8
Even on this board, the idea was that the Q of Vancouver would midlifed and then based at Langdale. Besides two spares would be beneficial for summer and long weekends. Modified how? |
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Aug 30, 2007 18:17:50 GMT -8
The Saanich already had a refit in 1990, you might as well just let the Van go and and leave the New West and saanich. It's always a good day on the forum, when someone refers to a post-impressionist artist, in a homophone kind of way.... |
|
|
|
Post by Coastal Canuck on Aug 30, 2007 18:43:54 GMT -8
why not keep both the Vancouver and the Saanich then keep the Vancouver at Departure Bay to do the Esquimalt's job in the Fall/Winter/Spring, as when there are huge lines at Departure Bay send the Vancouver across and the Saanich as The Esquimalt's summer job at Langdale or the other way around. Then in the winter they can sit at Deas ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by Fenklebaum on Aug 30, 2007 19:28:49 GMT -8
The Saanich already had a refit in 1990, you might as well just let the Van go and and leave the New West and saanich. It's always a good day on the forum, when someone refers to a post-impressionist artist, in a homophone kind of way.... ;D You, sir, are a singular wit. Fenk, the deuce |
|
|
|
Post by hwy19man on Aug 30, 2007 20:26:04 GMT -8
Even on this board, the idea was that the Q of Vancouver would midlifed and then based at Langdale. Besides two spares would be beneficial for summer and long weekends. Modified how? Sorry Tsawwassen, I should have put a hyphen in the word and better grammar.  I meant to say ... would be mid--lifed... |
|
|
|
Post by Hardy on Aug 30, 2007 21:30:06 GMT -8
Well, those boats are past their mid-life. We'd be 3/4-life-ing them at this point.
I am not against spending some money NOW on these ships to have spares around -- the 4th (and follow on) newbuilds of the Coastal Class are still going to be a ways off, budgetarily anyways. How much will it cost to throw 10-more years of life into the Vancouver? $10mill? Can we cut it down to $8 if we skip some of the "frilly soft upgrades" and just concentrate on plant work?
I lean towards the idea of having at least 1 spare (better 2!) to service the increasing traffic. Yes, there are plans to swap boats around, but take a serious look at the summertime congestion that we currently have.
Yes, I know the arguments about COSTS and that as a quasi-private entity, BCFS has to justify running extra sailings etc etc. I have read all the posts and taken the information to heart. However, current sailing data only tells 3/4 to 7/8's of the real story.
The other part is WHAT-IF, it always has been, and always will be. We can see hard data on load factors and wait times etc for the major routes -- Rte-2 comes to mind, with the chronic waits. How would having SCHEDULED hourly sailings on that route impact load factor? We cannot say for SURE how much traffic would divert from other locations or would chose hourly Rte-2 service IF IT WERE AVAILABLE .... we can project these numbers, but we cannot know them for certain.
Add to this the whole "The Coastals will save the day" line -- this is not true. They are great new ships and have SOME increased capacity. However, switching boats ALONE is NOT the answer AT ALL. Increased SERVICE _AND_ CAPACITY on the routes IS the answer.
Should BCFS diversify and run truck only commercial sailings out of other terminals? Who knows! I have no hard data. Someone SHOULD do it, and there are barge services now that do (they have all been named and detailed). They do not generally work for "attended" or driven commercial vehicles. Would I use overnight commercial service run by BCFS? Yes, if I had that option and could work it into my schedules. Would others? Depends on cost versus the options. How many drop-trailers could BCFS steal from WMG or Van-Isle barge if they offered overnight service? Hard to say -- those companies that ship drop-trailers are geared for it now ... could they retool/rethink? Possibly -- depends on cost. Should BCFS offer drop-trailer service? If and only if they are running off-hours commercial only sailings! Without a doubt then. This being the case, we can find the numbers and the revenue to make it worthwhile. It would involve capital costs (lots and yard-goats and their drivers) and chew up real-estate. It could be done, and done competitively as there is a HUGE increase in commercial traffic.
To summize, there are a lot of variables. There are several good case studies for keeping a couple of V's around with minimal investment even as spare boats for established routes. There are more cases available for renovating the existing V's and stuffing them on new revenue commercial routes IF someone wants to do the marketting and leg work on it. Best bet would be use them short term as replacements, and unmodified commercial "draught horses" to justify keeping them. Then if the case for commercial routes is proven, sink some money into them, renovate them for that purpose and run them for their additional 10-12 years.
Forget not, that if they are run as spares and/or commercial only boats, then they do not need the best of amenities. As commercial boats, figure that each "rig" is 75' long. A drop trailer will be 48'-53'. A straight truck (5 ton which I drive) is about 34-36' How many of these do you load? Figure at worst, a driver and co-driver per "truck". Assume, discounting drop-trailers, that each "truck" is an average of 50'. Divide commercial (overheight) lanemeters by 50' for each truck, multiply by 2 passengers and then figure out your skeleton crew. Toss in a few cars/buses that may travel off-hours (THEREBY eliminating MORE MD sailings _IF_ the non-commercial customers realize they are travelling on a bare-bones commercial sailing) and you have your crewing requirements. Limited food service, no gift shop, dont need arcades. Throw coin-op showers even in a crew-area that the truckers can use .... bingo - instant commercial grade boat.
|
|
Neil
Voyager 
Posts: 7,171
|
Post by Neil on Aug 30, 2007 21:48:38 GMT -8
Remember, at the last AGM, Hahn mused about keeping at least one V, and exploring the option of late night or expanded commercial service. They haven't given us any further word on their plans in that area since. We might just see it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Hardy on Aug 31, 2007 0:33:06 GMT -8
Remember, at the last AGM, Hahn mused about keeping at least one V, and exploring the option of late night or expanded commercial service. They haven't given us any further word on their plans in that area since. We might just see it. I remember this tid-bit. I've recently talked to some drivers who drop trailers at both VanIsle Barge and WMG with respect to the volumes of trailers that are being shipped. As I have limited contact with "freight" drivers, my information is limited to the 5 individuals that I have talked to, and is 2nd hand information of THEIR trips to those terminals to drop of trailers. Suffice to say that major transportation companies are using BOTH VIB and WMG at this point, and not single-sourcing their business. I am told that the "marshalling yards" are generally full, and "pick up" drivers are being urged to clear out their trailers from destination ASAP-INS. I don't have "vessel usage" numbers, and I don't have time to go and stake out the terminals to see how busy they are, but I would guess that they are running 85+% overall load factor, 100% on most runs. FYI: WMG - Coastal Intermodal (Seaspan): www.coastalintermodal.com/VIB - VanIsle Barge: www.vanislebarge.com/Also -- Coastal Intermodal has there tariff posted -- interesting read, seeing as they are the "big dog" in this arena of drop trailers..... www.coastalintermodal.com/SCIC_Tariff_No_34.pdfAll this said -- I think that BCFS would be delinquent in their mandate if they did not INVESTIGATE (seriously, and not just kicking the tires!) offering commercial only service. |
|
|
|
Post by oceaneer77 on Aug 31, 2007 8:55:53 GMT -8
I think we are forgetting Transport canada.
These old ships just do not meet an of the new codes...
I think hardy may be on to something with the truck only but still dont think that even with only say 50 passengers TC would wave off the new solas rules (vmax i think)
With all of that said we have no idea about the condition of the hulls and other running gear. Wastage of the hull past 20-25% is the cut figure. If these boats were seriously surveyed (TC and Lloyds would do this if we changed thier class or did extensive modifications) how much would be left? They were never designed to last this long, and with the level of upkeep given to them it is a miricale that they keep going.
BCF is known for Band Aids and Fix ups to keep things runnning.. The V and B class have recived more than thier fair share
I know i will get blasted for this but i cant wait to see them go... They are done and watching them languish is just more then i can take!
(just got back from greece and most of thiier boats look better!)
Oceaneer 77
|
|
|
|
Post by Northern Exploration on Aug 31, 2007 9:24:11 GMT -8
I would love for one or two to stay in service somehow. But keeping them all would be cost prohibitive to make them comply and safe. I would love to see a one lifted (likely the New West), one stretched (Burnaby or Nanaimo  ) and good old Tswwassen (just for sentimental purposes) hang around. However, the might $ will need to speak and time does march on. Nothing stays the same for ever. |
|
|
|
Post by Mac Write on Aug 31, 2007 11:18:45 GMT -8
I would personally love to see the life of a ferry 20-25 years tops, but that ain't going to happen.
|
|
|
|
Post by oceaneer77 on Aug 31, 2007 12:00:23 GMT -8
Yes 20-25 years
IMO wants 15 year life span! Our ferries do not fair so well in that scenario!
Oceaneer77
|
|
Mirrlees
Voyager
Bathtub!
Deck Engineer- Queen of Richmond
Posts: 1,013
|
Post by Mirrlees on Aug 31, 2007 12:51:07 GMT -8
Yes 20-25 years IMO wants 15 year life span! Our ferries do not fair so well in that scenario! Oceaneer77 If this were the case, we would be saying goodbye to the Spirits...   |
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on Aug 31, 2007 19:01:15 GMT -8
And what about WSF's 80 year old Steel Electrics? Or AMHS's 45 year old Spaulding designed Blue Canoes (they do seem to be more reliable then their much newer running mates). And why are the B's still okay but the V's are not? They all entered service between 1962 (Vancouver) and 1965 (Burnaby), making their age ranges 42 to 45 years. Why would Transport Canada allow the 'B's to continue in service for another 10 years making them 52 or 53 years old at retirement?
|
|
Mirrlees
Voyager
Bathtub!
Deck Engineer- Queen of Richmond
Posts: 1,013
|
Post by Mirrlees on Aug 31, 2007 19:22:54 GMT -8
Up until last year the Nanaimo was sailing with a condemned Co2 fire supression system. Both B's have unergone extensive renovations while the V's have been unchanged since they were lifted.
This leaves me to believe that the fire fighting systems on the V's are a ticking time bomb after all; they, (BCFC) did let the Nanny go to pot. Who knows what shape the V's are in?
ps: except for the Saanich's new interior in 1997.
|
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on Aug 31, 2007 19:31:37 GMT -8
Yes, but wastage of the hulls? Would not all the ships be significantly degraded by this point? The exception would be the QNWM which had extensive hull work done at the time of lifting. I don't think that the other B hulls have been touched since they were built 4 decades ago.
|
|
Mirrlees
Voyager
Bathtub!
Deck Engineer- Queen of Richmond
Posts: 1,013
|
Post by Mirrlees on Aug 31, 2007 19:52:52 GMT -8
I can honestly say that I don't have an answer to that one. It could be that TC " looked the other way" when they saw that BCFS had made improvements to the life-saving equipment on the B's. There-by, extending their certificates for a few more years.
I do think that TC has wanted BCFS to get rid of the V's ASAP.
|
|
) and good old Tswwassen (just for sentimental purposes) hang around. However, the might $ will need to speak and time does march on. Nothing stays the same for ever.
