|
Post by SS Shasta on Jul 23, 2007 19:14:09 GMT -8
It would seem reasonable to me that a minimum of 3 would have to be kept ready for service. A minimum to 2 are needed on the Port Townsend/Keystone route during the spring-summer-fall months. A 3rd would be needed as back up. If there was a break down, Evergreen is too large to fill in. Also, the 3rd vessel could still be used for a emergency on the San Juan Islands and Point Defiance routes. Does this make sense?
|
|
|
Post by EGfleet on Jul 24, 2007 15:22:42 GMT -8
It would seem reasonable to me that a minimum of 3 would have to be kept ready for service. A minimum to 2 are needed on the Port Townsend/Keystone route during the spring-summer-fall months. A 3rd would be needed as back up. If there was a break down, Evergreen is too large to fill in. Also, the 3rd vessel could still be used for a emergency on the San Juan Islands and Point Defiance routes. Does this make sense? WSF has already said they're going to retire two. One EG State Class will be used at Point Defiance, one in the San Juans. There's only two boats used at Keystone five months out of the year, which hardly justifies keeping a third 80 year old, obsolete vessel certified. I love the Steel E's as much as anyone, but they're ancient money pits that need to be retired, and the sooner the better.
|
|
|
Post by SS Shasta on Jul 24, 2007 18:04:58 GMT -8
WSF has already said they're going to retire two. One EG State Class will be used at Point Defiance, one in the San Juans. There's only two boats used at Keystone five months out of the year, which hardly justifies keeping a third 80 year old, obsolete vessel certified. I love the Steel E's as much as anyone, but they're ancient money pits that need to be retired, and the sooner the better. I would think that the public deserves better than this. A summer breakdown can happen to any vessel. Where would a replacement vessel be found if there was a summer breakdown? It has been stated somewhere on this board that the Rhody can no longer serve this route. Hopefully the local legislator representing the area can provide WSF management with some guidance on this issue.
|
|
|
Post by zman on Jul 25, 2007 9:28:29 GMT -8
With the latest maintenance issues, it seems that it may be tough to determine what two vessels to keep in service...They all seem to have their specific issues.
|
|
|
Post by Barnacle on Jul 26, 2007 7:29:14 GMT -8
I would think that the public deserves better than this. A summer breakdown can happen to any vessel. Where would a replacement vessel be found if there was a summer breakdown? It has been stated somewhere on this board that the Rhody can no longer serve this route. Hopefully the local legislator representing the area can provide WSF management with some guidance on this issue. Okay, I'll say it. You're just now noticing that this might be a problem? I would have thought the vessel shortage at WSF would've been obvious--if not when they dragged the Nisqually out of retirement, then at least when the re-certified the Hiyu.
|
|
|
Post by SS Shasta on Aug 21, 2007 10:17:57 GMT -8
WARNING: THIS POST CONTAINS SOME NOSTALGIA Yesterday was a wonderful day for a ride on a Washington State Ferry. It was extra special because the ferry was MV Nisqually. In spite of the bad publicity that the Steel Electrics received during this past year, MV Nisqually looked clean and well kept after her four years of retirement. There were a few rust spots here and there, but most of her outside paint looked good. We made the journey as walk on passengers from Keystone on MV Nisqually, then had a wonderful lunch in Port Townsend, and after spending too much money in a local art shop, returned to Keystone on MV Klickitat. Hope my photos turn out. It was a bit sad, however, that the galleys on both vessels were closed. That issue apparently goes on and on. Next week it will be time for the annual journey to the Islands and hopefully a ride on the revered MV Evergreen State. These journeys remind me so much of my childhood on the Sound, when I had the special honor of riding on the wonderful Wooden Electrics, SS San Mateo, MV Chippewa, MV Leschi, MV Crosline and the other "great ones." Back then we avoided Evergreen and the Steel Electrics because they were "just too modern."
|
|
|
Post by SS San Mateo on Aug 21, 2007 11:37:18 GMT -8
It was a bit sad, however, that the galleys on both vessels were closed. That issue apparently goes on and on. I wonder if CDX decided to discontinue food service on the Pt. Townsend-Keystone route or there are other issues. I haven't seen anything about the galleys being "closed until further notice".
|
|
|
Post by SS San Mateo on Aug 21, 2007 13:49:27 GMT -8
Is WSF going to keep all four Steels, or just two for the PT/Keystone run? Does anybody know that if this is the case, which two would go to razor blade city? With the way things are going, it's almost a given that the Illahee will be the first to go (if the tube replacement doesn't work). Based on recent news reports, the Quinault could be gone soon as well.
|
|
|
Post by EGfleet on Aug 21, 2007 15:19:00 GMT -8
Is WSF going to keep all four Steels, or just two for the PT/Keystone run? Does anybody know that if this is the case, which two would go to razor blade city? With the way things are going, it's almost a given that the Illahee will be the first to go (if the tube replacement doesn't work). Based on recent news reports, the Quinault could be gone soon as well. It is quite likely that these two might not see service again. Given the conditions of the hulls and the fact that they're 80 years old, they're simply not worth the expense of investing millions of dollars in to renovate the hulls.
|
|
|
Post by Political Incorrectness on Aug 21, 2007 16:01:31 GMT -8
You might as well start looking at the BCFS intermediate vessel design since she can carry 85 or 125. I am not sure how they would regulate the platform deck because I know Transport Canada regulations prohibit loading while the platforms are being raised or lowered even on the other side I believe. (I hope one of the BCFS workers could help).
|
|
|
Post by SS Shasta on Sept 8, 2007 9:33:25 GMT -8
Just wondering if the USCG is overreacting a bit by requiring that MV Nisqually be pulled from service 3 weeks early on Monday for hull inspection and removal of concrete ballast? If conditions were this urgent with the Steel Electrics, why did USCG issue a new COI for MV Nisqually on 7 May 2007? This is considering that she had been idle for 4 years and had an expired COI.
I spoke with WSF workers at Keystone this summer and they said that MV Nisqually has been the most "trouble free" vessel on the route and this has been the primary reason she has worked as #1 most of the time. She has not experienced hull leaks like the others in her class and except for a few minor issues in May, has performed well during this very busy summer.
|
|
|
Post by Barnacle on Sept 9, 2007 4:06:32 GMT -8
I don't think they're overreacting given what they've found on the other two boats. The Q&I have received rather more in-depth inspections than what they have in the past given all the trouble they've had lately... it's possible that the Nisqually could have the trouble brewing.
As for pulling the Nisqually three weeks early, this might be a good time to mention that the USCG wanted all four boats inspected by August 1. Begging and pleading got the Nisqually stalled on this long.
|
|
|
Post by SS San Mateo on Sept 9, 2007 17:11:20 GMT -8
As for pulling the Nisqually three weeks early, this might be a good time to mention that the USCG wanted all four boats inspected by August 1. Begging and pleading got the Nisqually stalled on this long. So basically all 4 boats could've ended up out of service at the same time if the extensions hadn't been granted?
|
|
|
Post by Barnacle on Sept 9, 2007 18:58:37 GMT -8
Yep, if the USCG had really gotten a burr under their saddle.
|
|
|
Post by SS San Mateo on Sept 10, 2007 8:36:48 GMT -8
Pt. Townsend-Keystone would've been totally SOL if that happened (assuming the Hiyu does have that "can't operate on routes that cross major shipping lanes" restriction).
|
|
|
Post by SS Shasta on Sept 10, 2007 9:59:42 GMT -8
When is MV Nisqually scheduled to have her intensive USCG inspection?
|
|
|
Post by hergfest on Sept 10, 2007 18:59:24 GMT -8
She is in Eagle Harbor right now, they haven't turned off her GPS tracker yet.
|
|
|
Post by old_wsf_fan on Sept 10, 2007 19:29:51 GMT -8
Since Todds has the Q-boat and the Illy still in drydock, has anybody heard any gossip on where the Nisqually might go?
I would think that Dakota Creek should have room.
|
|
|
Post by Barnacle on Sept 11, 2007 17:58:15 GMT -8
The Nisqually should be having her inspection fairly soon... Dakota Creek's full at the moment now, save for the BIG drydock (which the Steelies really don't merit).
|
|
|
Post by SS Shasta on Sept 17, 2007 12:11:25 GMT -8
Just wondering if this concrete ballast that the CG is worried about was/is being removed from the Steel Electrics at a commercial yard or at the Eagle Harbor maintenance yard? I noticed that MV Nisqually is apparently still at Eagle Harbor. According to the WSF folks that I spoke with this summer at Keystone, she has been the only Steel Electric that did not have a problem with leaks while in service this spring/summer.
|
|
|
Post by old_wsf_fan on Sept 17, 2007 16:48:10 GMT -8
This is just my opinion with no facts to back it up. Since the Nisqually and the Klickitat are the same age as the other Steels that have had recent problems, when they are inspected in depth, they are probably going to find the same stern tube degradation that has occured with the Q-boat and the Illahee.
I think the Coast Guard is not going to let WSF keep the Steels in service without all of them receiving the same repairs.
|
|
|
Post by Barnacle on Sept 17, 2007 16:55:09 GMT -8
Wow. Stop the forum, I need to get off... we actually agree on something! Seriously though, I think you're right. I suspect they'll find the same degradation of the stern tubes in the Niqsually and Klickitat that they have in the Quinault and Illahee, and again the repairs will have to be made. That having been said, the Nisqually did have the best record this year for keeping the water on the right side of the plating.
|
|
|
Post by old_wsf_fan on Oct 2, 2007 20:11:28 GMT -8
According to Evergreen Fleet's website , the Nisqually is rumored to be pretty bad off. It is kind of odd that she was returned to service in the first place if she is in poor shape.
During the summer, she had no leaks, and except for one occurence, had no problems.
Until the replacement ferries are constructed, I think WSF needs to invest in keeping all of the Steels running. It probably is not wise from an economic standpoint, but when there was a shortage of boats to go around this past year, the Nisqually was needed.
After all, the Fleet is not getting any younger and until the State changes it's policy regarding timely replacement of vessels and proper funding of the system in general, they need the extra Steel- E. If WSF rotates all of the Steels on a regular basis, they will all last longer untill they can be replaced.
|
|
|
Post by Barnacle on Oct 3, 2007 7:49:27 GMT -8
According to Evergreen Fleet's website , the Nisqually is rumored to be pretty bad off. It is kind of odd that she was returned to service in the first place if she is in poor shape. During the summer, she had no leaks, and except for one occurence, had no problems. Until the replacement ferries are constructed, I think WSF needs to invest in keeping all of the Steels running. It probably is not wise from an economic standpoint, but when there was a shortage of boats to go around this past year, the Nisqually was needed. After all, the Fleet is not getting any younger and until the State changes it's policy regarding timely replacement of vessels and proper funding of the system in general, they need the extra Steel- E. If WSF rotates all of the Steels on a regular basis, they will all last longer untill they can be replaced. The shortage of boats that happened this year was created by the sudden removal of Steel-Electrics from service, an event which isn't likely to occur again but none the less demonstrates that they are the biggest problems. I think WSF would be better off to give up on the saddest one of the bunch (whichever it turns out to be) and spread the remaining maintenance money (such as it is) over the remaining three, thus greatly decreasing the likelihood of a sudden removal from service.
|
|
|
Post by SS Shasta on Oct 3, 2007 10:03:56 GMT -8
According to Evergreen Fleet's website , the Nisqually is rumored to be pretty bad off. It is kind of odd that she was returned to service in the first place if she is in poor shape. During the summer, she had no leaks, and except for one occurence, had no problems. Until the replacement ferries are constructed, I think WSF needs to invest in keeping all of the Steels running. It probably is not wise from an economic standpoint, but when there was a shortage of boats to go around this past year, the Nisqually was needed. After all, the Fleet is not getting any younger and until the State changes it's policy regarding timely replacement of vessels and proper funding of the system in general, they need the extra Steel- E. If WSF rotates all of the Steels on a regular basis, they will all last longer untill they can be replaced. I agree!!!! If something was wrong with MV Nisqually this spring, why did the CG reissue its COI that had expired? According to WSF folks that I talked to at Keystone this summer, MV Nisqually was the most trouble free of the Steels this year. This was the main reason she was serving as the #1 vessel on the route. There were a few minor issues during her first week of operation after being idle for 4 years, but they were resolved quickly. If there was something seriously wrong with the vessel, why did she pass the CG inspection last May?
|
|