|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Jun 19, 2005 15:28:06 GMT -8
I've heard about problems with WSF having limited choice about which ships to use for Keystone Harbour run......but the problem wasn't clear to me until I did some research and saw some pictures of the harbour.....
Man oh man, that is one tight little harbour. Why they put a ferry-landing in that tight spot is beyond me. And now that it's there, the local residends don't seem to want to move it anywhere else. A case of "NIMBY on Whidby", pardon the rhyme.
No wonder they have to use the historical Steel-Electric class for that run, and even then, they still have accidents, like the mishap at the end of May.
It would be like BC Ferries having to use the Smokwa, to service a tight spot......sounds ridiculous.
All that being said, I would like to take the route, just for the novelty factor.
But my oh my, that picture sure shocked me, to actually see how tight a squeeze that harbour entrance really is.
ps: change of topic: in the Michael Douglas / Demi Moore movie of "Disclosure", was his character living at Bremerton, or Bainbridge Island. Does anyone remember this, with the WSF shots in the movie?
But don't take this away from the original topic here....that Keystone Harbour still has my head shaking.
|
|
|
|
Post by SS San Mateo on Jun 19, 2005 18:29:20 GMT -8
WSF probably wasn't thinking of the future when they put the dock there. Also, Olympic Ferries (which operated the route prior to WSF taking over in the early 1970's) had the dock there.
-- LB
|
|
|
|
Post by hergfest on Jun 19, 2005 23:44:24 GMT -8
What San Mateo said is correct, they inherited the terminal. They originally had the Olympic or Rhody on that route, both of which have a small draft so they would fit in the harbor. Then they needed more room so they rebuilt the Steel Electrics which were the only other boats with a small enough draft to fit. WSF had wanted to relocate the terminal but the locals didn't want it. So now they want to widen the channel and dredge it so an Issaquah 130 Class can be used on the route. This would mean that they would only have to use one boat year round, saving money. They would plan on adding a second boat in the future when traffic demanded it. On the WSF website there is link to the Keystone Harbor Study which outlines all of this. And yes, I am a nerd for reading the whole thing.
|
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Jun 20, 2005 7:02:17 GMT -8
thanks for the info people.
|
|
Koastal Karl
Voyager 
Been on every BC Ferry now!!!!!
Posts: 7,747
|
Post by Koastal Karl on Jun 20, 2005 8:52:16 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by SS San Mateo on Jun 20, 2005 9:13:19 GMT -8
There's a park on the right side. I think it's a historical site as well.
-- LB
|
|
|
|
Post by Political Incorrectness on Jun 20, 2005 9:50:13 GMT -8
there is also wildlife as well so it is very hard to modify.
|
|
|
|
Post by hergfest on Jun 20, 2005 9:51:28 GMT -8
Fort Casey is on the north side of the harbor. It is a State Park, so there are some issues there. Plus they have to go through some pretty hefty environmental work before they can start.
|
|
|
|
Post by NMcKay on Jun 20, 2005 9:56:05 GMT -8
they need a K class vessel there. something with the ability to move sideways and stuff, and a lengthened K class would work fine.
|
|
|
|
Post by Political Incorrectness on Jun 20, 2005 10:30:51 GMT -8
one problem the capacity so might as well relocate a few yards away or a mile.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dane on Jun 20, 2005 17:03:05 GMT -8
They could lash 8 K Class together, and it may work.
That harbour is nothing but trouble and I too wonder why in the world they won't move it. It's not even in a particularly convient location for anyone to get there, except people that live in that small residiential area. I assume something is going to be done about this before the new mid sized vessels come on line.
|
|
Koastal Karl
Voyager
Been on every BC Ferry now!!!!!
Posts: 7,747
|
Post by Koastal Karl on Jun 20, 2005 21:13:30 GMT -8
Where are the toll booths located or do you even have to pay on that side?? Dosent look like there is anything at the terminal except the holding area. I hope to take the Keystone to Port Townsend ferry this summer.
|
|
|
|
Post by hergfest on Jun 20, 2005 23:53:56 GMT -8
The toll booth is there. The holding area is pretty small, on busy summer days traffic gets backed up onto the street.
|
|
|
|
Post by YZFNick on Jun 21, 2005 12:44:15 GMT -8
That's crazy, there's nothing even close to being equivilant in BC Ferries' ports.
|
|
|
|
Post by NMcKay on Jun 21, 2005 16:33:15 GMT -8
what is the capacity required?
|
|
|
|
Post by hergfest on Jun 21, 2005 17:53:31 GMT -8
I am doing this from memory, but I think the terminal currently holds about 100 cars, they need 200-250 for the new terminal. The Steel Electrics hold 64 cars, the Issaquah 130s carry 124. WSF lowered the holding capacity of their entire fleet because of some marine evacuation routes added to the ships, plus a few had elevators added which hurt capacity (especially on the Supers). But on busy sailings they load up the marine evacuation routes anyways from what I hear.
|
|
|
|
Post by SS San Mateo on Jun 21, 2005 19:00:56 GMT -8
But on busy sailings they load up the marine evacuation routes anyways from what I hear. Especially on the Rhododendron (which, unlike all the other vessels, does not have a center tunnel). The crew on that vessel hardly makes any attempt to keep the routes clear. -- LB |
|
|
|
Post by NMcKay on Jun 21, 2005 19:45:04 GMT -8
okay, then im guessing that a K 165 would work right, Carrying 165 Cars running @ 12 Knots, and with some additions, then youd be able to put proper pax spaces too...all is well then
|
|
