|
|
Post by Ferryman on Apr 3, 2005 9:40:49 GMT -8
Hmm looks like Surrey has been running too hard or something on her huge route?  Well Esquimalt is taking over for her on her last round trip tonight so they can repair Surrey all night tonight. |
|
Koastal Karl
Voyager 
Been on every BC Ferry now!!!!!
Posts: 7,747
|
Post by Koastal Karl on Apr 3, 2005 10:18:43 GMT -8
probably better as the last roundtrips I dont think would be too busy.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dane on Apr 3, 2005 16:04:31 GMT -8
Surrey should have gone in before the Oak Bay for mid-life, that's been my opinion ever since the fire. She's unreliable (and incidently very very rusty considering she had a refit. Obviouslly they're holding the aesthetic work off until October)
|
|
|
|
Post by Curtis on Apr 3, 2005 16:18:51 GMT -8
Yeah they should of did her first Langdale needed a new ship then she could go to Nanaimo than the Coq does the route
|
|
|
|
Post by Balfour on Apr 3, 2005 20:11:41 GMT -8
The Queen of Surrey is cursed! Two summers ago when I was at Langdale waiting to head home, some terminal staff guy told me this. This was obvioulsy summer 2003 after her fires, and some other propeller issue on the August Long Weekend. I believe the curse is still there. Late in September this past year, the Surrey broke down in time for Mardi Gras Camp at Byng. The Esquimalt was crowded, and the route was busy with 500 Scouts and Guides going to this camp, in fact so busy that BCF added 2 extra sailings out of HSB. Thankfully the surrey was back on sunday when everyone had to go home. Our Camp Chief decsribed the Esquimalt as "taking a day and a half" to do the route.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dane on Apr 3, 2005 20:26:06 GMT -8
Supposedly I've heard she was never fully repaired post fire, in that there are a lot of "mechanical bandages" rather than proper, long-term solutions since it was known there was a midlife programme to commence. However, this programme has failed to put a lot of money into mechanical restoration, rather it is focused on the customer areas and new life saving/cooling systems that don't solve pre-existing problems.
|
|
|
|
Post by nolonger on Apr 3, 2005 21:51:15 GMT -8
There is some truth to that. Mid life refits have stood in the way of proper maintenance leading up to it. I'm told that the Alberni is only getting a mini refit next year because the midlife is coming in 2006/2007. One has to remember that these vessels have operated for the most part 24/7/365 with only a few hours down time at night. Transport Canada would not let the vessel sail if unsafe. Really makes no difference weather the Surrey went 1st or the Oak Bay. It's my understanding that the Oak Bay was in sad shape and that's why she went 1st. And she'll be on the Langdale run when she comes out, and the Surrey will be the relief boat until her mid life is done.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dane on Apr 3, 2005 22:40:51 GMT -8
Sad shape or not, the Oak Bay had a much stronger record of actually sailing. Thats what the costumer ses, and that's why the ferries are there in the first place.
|
|
|
|
Post by NMcKay on Apr 4, 2005 6:52:08 GMT -8
shes out again thismorning for one round trip
|
|
|
|
Post by Curtis on Apr 4, 2005 18:00:32 GMT -8
The Surrey has had 3 Mecanical delays today 2 in the morning one in the afternoon that can't be good
|
|
|
|
Post by Balfour on Apr 4, 2005 18:57:51 GMT -8
Does any one know what exactly has been wrong with the Surrey over the last couple of days? I haven't seen any service notices on the BCF website regarding this.
|
|
|
|
Post by NMcKay on Apr 4, 2005 19:10:21 GMT -8
i think shes just breaking down. all the patches and stuff they put on her must be starting to fail. they need to finish up with the oaky so that the surrey can take a rest
|
|
|
|
Post by Balfour on Apr 4, 2005 19:13:49 GMT -8
The Surrey is Cursed!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by nolonger on Apr 4, 2005 19:53:58 GMT -8
Sad shape or not, the Oak Bay had a much stronger record of actually sailing. Thats what the costumer ses, and that's why the ferries are there in the first place. Sailing where? She moved around. Thus incurring some down time in between locations to get some work done. The Surrey was required to maintain the Rte 3 schedule. This only allows time for routine maintenance and fuelling. I'm telling you the Oak Bay needed to go 1st. I sailed on her for 5 years out of horseshoe bay and she always had the rep of being held together with bailing wire and bubble gum. That's why she is the orphan ship and the Surrey is not. |
|
|
|
Post by Balfour on Apr 4, 2005 19:58:29 GMT -8
What's with that low buzzing noise coming out of the Surrey's funnel?
|
|
|
|
Post by nolonger on Apr 4, 2005 20:13:01 GMT -8
haven't been on her since Dec. I'm going over there to see my folks on the weekend. I'll have a listen. (if she sails) |
|
|
|
Post by Dane on Apr 4, 2005 20:36:43 GMT -8
Sailing anywhere... BC Ferries has reliability statistics you should have access too. I would bet Strong Skier's Graduation that the Oaky has a better reliability than the Surrey.
The Oak Bay may be held toegether by bubble gum, I don't doubt you at all, but it sounds like they haven't even gone to the corner store for the Surrey yet.
|
|
|
|
Post by nolonger on Apr 4, 2005 20:46:13 GMT -8
Surrey has had a rough time for sure. And her problems are cause by more than age alone. You'd be amazed at how much control the Senior Chief Engineer has in regards to how much money is spent. Passed practice has been for some of them to try to look better in management's eyes by spending less. It's no coincidence that the Surrey's problems started with the arrival of a new senior chief about 3 years ago. he's moved on now, I won't say where to. Having said that, the Oak Bay went 1st because she needed to.
|
|
|
|
Post by Curtis on Apr 4, 2005 20:57:11 GMT -8
They shouldn't wait till next winter they should do it as soon as the Oakys done she needs new engines
|
|
|
|
Post by NMcKay on Apr 4, 2005 21:28:05 GMT -8
yeah
they are probably approaching if not surpassing thier 250,000 hour lifespan
|
|
|
|
Post by Ferryman on Apr 4, 2005 21:46:20 GMT -8
Hey back in the 80s didn't she smash into the dock at Horseshoe Bay and do lots of damage to the dock and her hull not long after she was launched. I'm not sure why, but I think her engines broke down coming into the dock or something. I remember BCTV bringing that up the day she had the fire and they showed her history. I bet that rumor is true, if a ship gets the same name another ship had before, then the second ship that gets called under that name gets cursed for its life or something. Anywho someone back me up on all of that.
|
|
|
|
Post by Retrovision on Apr 4, 2005 22:14:27 GMT -8
The Surrey was running over 20 minutes late when I passed through Horseshoe Bay (I took pics -- see them under the 'Feature Photos' section @: )
Though she seemed to have made up the time in short order:
Langdale to Horseshoe Bay
Sailing time: 40 MINUTES QUEEN OF SURREY,
Monday, April 04, 2005
Vessel Scheduled Departure Actual Departure
Queen of Surrey 8:20 AM 8:41 AM
Queen of Surrey 10:20 AM 10:57 AM
Queen of Surrey 12:20 PM 12:53 PM
Queen of Surrey 2:30 PM 2:49 PM
Queen of Surrey 4:30 PM 4:32 PM
Queen of Surrey 6:30 PM 6:27 PM
Queen of Surrey 8:20 PM 8:19 PM
I noticed that there were no notes remarking why she was so far behind schedule, when in the past I've seen notes made on sailings that are as little as 10 minutes late.
|
|
|
|
Post by Retrovision on Apr 4, 2005 22:17:14 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by nolonger on Apr 8, 2005 16:12:26 GMT -8
yeah they are probably approaching if not surpassing thier 250,000 hour lifespan Actually if she ran 16 hours a day which she does and always did it would take about 42 years to reach 250,000 hours. New Engines? I don't think so. The older C class vessels didn't need new engines. Why should the Surrey which is 5 years younger. |
|
|
|
Post by NMcKay on Apr 8, 2005 16:20:43 GMT -8
i thinkk i was 250,000 but i think in reality its 20,000...thats what the klatawas engines are rated for...(i think)
|
|
Well Esquimalt is taking over for her on her last round trip tonight so they can repair Surrey all night tonight. 
