Koastal Karl
Voyager 
Been on every BC Ferry now!!!!!
Posts: 7,747
|
Post by Koastal Karl on Nov 14, 2006 9:56:38 GMT -8
QPR to Drydock Posted November 14, 2006 Starting November 19 On Sunday, November 19, the MV Queen of Prince Rupert will be temporarily removed from service to repair a leaking seal. This unscheduled repair addresses a maintenance issue and is not a safety concern. The vessel will leave for drydock immediately following the arrival and unloading of all traffic travelling on the Port Hardy to Prince Rupert sailing that afternoon. The Queen of Prince Rupert is expected to return to operation in time for the scheduled 2:00 pm sailing from Prince Rupert to Port Hardy sailing on Friday, November 24. Should there be a change from this date, updates will be provided. As there is no replacement available for the Queen of Prince Rupert, service on the Inside Passage and to the Queen Charlotte Islands will be suspended while the vessel is away. Every effort is being made to contact customers with existing reservations. A barge service will be available for commercial carriers traveling between Prince Rupert and the Queen Charlotte Islands. For details, please contact Prince Rupert Terminal at (250) 624-9627. For updates or more information, please check online at www.bcferries.com, or call Prince Rupert Terminal at (250) 624-9627, Port Hardy Terminal at (250) 949-6722, Skidegate Terminal at (250) 559-4485 or toll free 1-888-223-3779 between 7:00 am and 10:00 pm. BC Ferries sincerely apologizes to our customers for any inconvenience as a result of this necessary maintenance. I wonder which drydock she is going to?? |
|
|
|
Post by NMcKay on Nov 14, 2006 17:03:48 GMT -8
i wonder if they could have held it off till the 15th of december when the Sonia arrives, she could theoretically be pushed into service immediatly if she meets ISO STandards.
|
|
|
|
Post by Queen of Nanaimo Teen on Nov 14, 2006 19:09:45 GMT -8
I saw it on the news today. They interviewed some people and they weren't very happy about it. Couldn't they hold off for a while though?
|
|
|
|
Post by jjr on Nov 14, 2006 19:59:42 GMT -8
A report on the CBC News website says that it is a leaking oil seal that needs to be replaced. Apparently the propellors were damaged a few weeks ago when the QPR ran over some crab traps. That makes me think that it is a seal around the propellor shaft and that is why she needs to go into drydock. Better safe than sorry I guess - imagine the howls if repairs were delayed and resulted in longer downtime. Or how about blowing the seal in the middle of Hecate Strait in a winter gale?
|
|
|
|
Post by Political Incorrectness on Nov 17, 2006 20:31:41 GMT -8
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,307
|
Post by Neil on Nov 18, 2006 14:31:02 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by SS Shasta on Nov 19, 2006 16:16:12 GMT -8
I didn't see her at the Ketchikan shipyards this afternoon (19 Nov). Any idea as to when she will arrive? Four AMHS vessels are currently in the yard including the long idled MV Columbia. One is in the drydock.
|
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on Nov 19, 2006 20:14:23 GMT -8
My understanding is that the QPR was to finish its run from Port Hardy to Prince Rupert at 3:00 pm this aftn. When unloaded it was to travel right away to Ketchikan. Assuming she is on schedule that would mean that she will arrive in Ketchikan this evening. Maybe there now.
However, the most recent post on the BCFS's website says that the drydock can not deal with the QPR just yet. So it may be a day or two before the QPR goes north to Alaska.
|
|
|
|
Post by SS Shasta on Nov 20, 2006 15:36:29 GMT -8
The MV Queen of Prince Rupert is now in the Ketchikan drydock. She must have arrived early this morning.  |
|
|
|
Post by Curtis on Nov 20, 2006 17:08:31 GMT -8
That's good. The quicker they get her done the quicker service resumes
|
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on Nov 20, 2006 19:51:47 GMT -8
The MV Queen of Prince Rupert is now in the Ketchikan drydock. She must have arrived early this morning. Mr. Shasta Any chance that you could get some digiital pictures and post them on this site. That would be a treat for us. Thanks, JST |
|
|
|
Post by SS Shasta on Nov 21, 2006 19:46:35 GMT -8
 MV Queen of Prince Rupert at Ketchikan Shipyards drydock on 20 November 2006. |
|
|
|
Post by Ferryman on Nov 21, 2006 20:15:06 GMT -8
Wow, thanks very much for taking that pic. Her bow sure takes a real beating with the rust, with all of the rain up there!
|
|
|
|
Post by hergfest on Nov 21, 2006 20:55:31 GMT -8
Did they have time to get her painted before she headed north this year? I know they had to rush the yard work.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ferryman on Nov 21, 2006 21:02:27 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by Balfour on Nov 22, 2006 8:41:11 GMT -8
It's funny because that picture is from March 30th, 2006...
|
|
|
|
Post by Ferryman on Nov 22, 2006 8:59:53 GMT -8
Nope, that pictures date is definitely accurate. The 'Rupert has always had a history of rusting up fast while being up there. The 'North was the same way, but I don't think it really ever would get as bad as the 'Rupert. But hey, the winter season is still near, and the Fall rains are far from being done up there, for the season. Just look at one of Jims photo of the Rupert from a few years ago. This picture would have been just weeks before her annual refit. i90.photobucket.com/albums/k268/wetcoastkidjst/Queen%20of%20Prince%20Rupert/QPR-BearCove1wallpaper.jpgAlso, another picture of the 'Rupert, on her way from Victoria, to Deas. You can see the difference in the tone of white, from the Dogwood Days, compared to todays tone of white. www.pbase.com/kstapleton/image/58028499 |
|
|
|
Post by SS Shasta on Nov 22, 2006 13:42:36 GMT -8
If she does rust up as fast you say - then maybe she also has wastage problems with her steel works? Does anyone know? What does the class report say about the wastage problem - that is if she has this problem. [shadow=red,left,300]RUST[/shadow] One needs to remember that she works most of the time in more adverse weather conditions than the norm on the lower coast. Here in SE Alaska, the AMHS vessels experience lots of surface rust after a busy year of service. The Alaska ferries, however, don't show it as much because of their dark blue coloured hulls. When one is on board, however, it is more visible. |
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on Nov 23, 2006 23:35:26 GMT -8
That rust is basically a function of Hecate Strait and Queen Charlotte Sound in the fall -winter months. The QPR takes a lot of spray and water over the bow.
The QotN, by contrast, did not operate on Hecate Strait other than 4 to 6 weeks per year, and then in the more gentle spring months.
Years ago the QotN did operate both routes in the winter and she did show the rust.
Thanks Shasta for the pic. You have wetted our appetite for more.
|
|
|
|
Post by Curtis on Nov 24, 2006 8:12:01 GMT -8
Imagine what it would be like if they didn't do anything to the rust on the QPR during her refits.
|
|
|
|
Post by Political Incorrectness on Nov 24, 2006 12:16:40 GMT -8
cascade, do you know the age of the Rupert? It rusts more than the norweigan ferries because it is not so "modern"
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,307
|
Post by Neil on Nov 24, 2006 12:51:37 GMT -8
but I also know of a large number of Norwegian Ferries who work in far worst condition and don't appear to rust up as fast or as bad. Hull colour does play a part in what we see - White shows it more than a Black hull or Red hull colour. Most Norwegian ferries, like ours, operate in sheltered waters. The ones you're refering to are probably the ships on the much more exposed Norwegian Coastal Voyage (eleven days long) which have dark coloured hulls, and show the rust much less than the 'Rupert. Most of them are also much younger. |
|
|
|
Post by landlocked on Nov 24, 2006 13:11:51 GMT -8
The poor old QPR suffers from a couple of misfortunes. 1) She always goes into drydock at the worst possible time of year. 2) BCFS don't spend the money on her for good quality coatings. I would be willing to bet that there's not one drop of modern high performance coatings above the waterline. Hence, poor coatings, applied at a lousy time of year, and you see the result.
The best example of a boat reborn is the Island Monarch, ex Seaspan Monarch, ex Harold A. Jones. In her last years of ownership by Seaspan, she was nothing but a rust bucket that you'd be sure is ready for the bone yard. When Island Tug and Barge bought her, they spent some money on her, including sandblasting and applying good epoxy coatings. You look at her today, and inside and out...she's spotless! The QPR could be the same way, colour excluded if they spent a little on a modern coating system.
It seems when BCFS boats start getting to the 25 - 30 year mark, and BCFS want rid of them, they go cheap on paint. A rusty tired old looking boat is the easiest way to convince your board (and prior to that the politicians in Victoria) of your need for a new boat. For a perfect example of that, look at the Sidney and the Coho prior to the Sidney being sold off.
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,307
|
Post by Neil on Nov 24, 2006 15:16:20 GMT -8
I don't think you need to go 'cheap on paint' to convince anyone of a need to replace the 'Rupert- it's forty years old, and some crew members were talking about the need for a new boat twenty years ago. The 'Rupert is usually in service over the winter, so it's probably not getting painted at the worst time.
What is the source of your info in BC Ferries' paint quality? I'm not challenging you, I'm just curious.
|
|
|
|
Post by landlocked on Nov 24, 2006 21:44:24 GMT -8
With respect to the paint quality, I do know of some 'insiders' who advised that the refits of the C's where they sandblasted was the first time they'd been done since they were built.
For a number of years I sold marine coatings. BCFS were in the 'stone age' at THAT time when it came to coatings, and were just starting to install high performance underwater coatings. Interestingly enough, they were were further ahead on bottom coatings than topsides. I also know that WSF were much further ahead than BCFS on their bottom coatings, having elected to choose epoxies for underwater YEARS ahead of BCFS.
From someone who does know, they do go cheap on the topsides, hence that's why so many of their boats look the way they do. No insult intended, just the way it is.
|
|
