|
|
Post by Barnacle on Jan 24, 2010 16:21:36 GMT -8
I'm surprised they didn't just put one bridge higher up in the middle. It would cost less, and would be more convenient for the bridge crew. They wouldn't have to walk back and forth whenever the ship berths. Generally we prefer to see the bow as we're docking, and that clearly wouldn't be possible if a single center bridge were to be used. |
|
|
|
Post by Barnacle on Jan 24, 2010 16:23:37 GMT -8
As for the "curtains", I believe this is to protect workers on all sides of the West Waterway from all the sparks that will be present as there will be a lot of welding done to secure the Nichols upper works to the ship. Also, they have the "pickle forks" to install as well as the railings. Add the glass windows and all the hardware, too! Actually it's about paint overspray. Sparks don't stay airborne for very long. |
|
Jody
Chief Steward
Ferry Foamer
Posts: 152
|
Post by Jody on Jan 24, 2010 16:45:13 GMT -8
I have a hard time believing it would be for paint overspray, as that doesn't provide any containment over the sides of the drydock. When they paint her, I would think they'd encase her in a manner similar to what they've done to the Chelan. The screens here might be for a visual block of the welding activity. The place I worked at required screens around all welding to protect other workers from the flash of the welding, which can harm your vision. But that's just a guess...
Jody
|
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Jan 24, 2010 17:31:57 GMT -8
Generally we prefer to see the bow as we're docking, and that clearly wouldn't be possible if a single center bridge were to be used. Why wouldn't you be able to see the bow from a single centre bridge? Similar to say this ship:  |
|
|
|
Post by Barnacle on Jan 24, 2010 18:20:48 GMT -8
You'll note the pronounced absence of a house that would be blocking the view of the bow, a la Kalakala.  Even the mighty Hiyu has no cabin obstructing the view from the single pilothouse, where the Chetzemoka's full-sized passenger cabin would necessitate raising the bridge up about twenty to thirty feet (without a drawing and a ruler handy to get a closer guess) above its current altitude to be seen over. And I would rather not run a boat from that much higher, as the rolling motion is that much more pronounced when higher up and the ground tends to sway for a few hours after the end of a rough day as it is. |
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Jan 24, 2010 18:44:32 GMT -8
You'll note the pronounced absence of a house that would be blocking the view of the bow, a la Kalakala. Thanks. My brain conveniently ignored the house that the Chetz has. Yes, the house would be an issue. (I'm so ashamed.... ;D) |
|
Neil
Voyager 
Posts: 7,312
|
Post by Neil on Jan 24, 2010 19:24:48 GMT -8
You'll note the pronounced absence of a house that would be blocking the view of the bow, a la Kalakala. Thanks. My brain conveniently ignored the house that the Chetz has. Yes, the house would be an issue. (I'm so ashamed.... ;D) The Island Sky's passenger cabin is probably just as big as the Chetzemoka's, and it has one wheelhouse. Seems to me this has more to do with WSF insisting that all their vessels have the same basic design pattern, as has been the case since '67, or arguably, since the Evergreen State. I seem to recall that when this project was announced, it was stipulated that the vessel had to fit the usual WSF profile, and I guess that means two wheelhouses, even on a boat well under 300'. |
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Jan 24, 2010 19:34:42 GMT -8
The Island Sky's passenger cabin is probably just as big as the Chetzemoka's, and it has one wheelhouse. Here's a photo example of said ship:  Is that bridge too high up for a ship like the C'Moka? |
|
Mill Bay
Voyager
Long Suffering Bosun
Posts: 2,887 
|
Post by Mill Bay on Jan 24, 2010 19:48:40 GMT -8
Generally we prefer to see the bow as we're docking, and that clearly wouldn't be possible if a single center bridge were to be used. Why wouldn't you be able to see the bow from a single centre bridge? Similar to say this ship: I think I know what the problem is. With a center wheelhouse, those WSF navigators might too easily lose they're sense of direction, and make the ship go astern instead of forward when they are docking. They can't have any rear facing windows in the wheelhouse, so that they can properly know which direction the bow is, because that is the only direction they can see out through the windows ;D. |
|
|
|
Post by Ferryman on Jan 24, 2010 21:44:29 GMT -8
We have an even better example for size comparisons in our fleet. The Queen of Chilliwack. When launched, she was somewhat aesthetically pleasing for being symetrical. But with her conversion to BCFs standards, they added a solarium right in front of one end of the bridge. I can only imagine how much of a pain it is to try and dock this thing at this end.  |
|
|
|
Post by whidbeyislandguy on Jan 24, 2010 22:07:08 GMT -8
I think the real point is we don't want any barge like boats....
|
|
|
|
Post by DENelson83 on Jan 25, 2010 1:44:21 GMT -8
So, the Chetzemoka's class now has a name, eh? "Kwa-di Tabil"?
Edit: Just found out that "Kwa-di Tabil" means "small boat". Very good choice.
|
|
|
|
Post by Northern Exploration on Jan 25, 2010 8:14:56 GMT -8
To add substantial height to allow for the use of a single wheelhouse changes the stability of the ship. If you compared the ISky with the new WSF design, I would imagine the Isky is broader and perhaps longer. The Chili is known to have a deep hull.
To raise a wheelhouse in the centre I would bet you would have to increase the beam and/or draught of the ship compared to the 64 Car Ferries. Extra weight and therefore extra fuel to push the ship ferry around.
|
|
Jody
Chief Steward
Ferry Foamer
Posts: 152
|
Post by Jody on Jan 25, 2010 9:50:35 GMT -8
Comparing a set of specs issued by BC Ferries about the Island Sky to the drawings WSF has online for the Chetzemoka, the Island Sky is about 60 feet longer than the Chetz, and 24 feet wider. It's also about 1,400 tons heavier, nearly 1.75 times the weight of the Chetz. And the passenger cabin that was stated elsewhere to be the same capacity as the Chetz actually carries about 300 fewer people - 450 vs. 750. Car capacity, on the other hand, is a little higher at 125 vs. 64. I couldn't find anything online about the Island Sky's draft.
Jody
|
|
FNS
Voyager
The Empire Builder train of yesteryear in HO scale
Posts: 4,957
|
Post by FNS on Jan 25, 2010 10:40:06 GMT -8
Comparing a set of specs issued by BC Ferries about the Island Sky to the drawings WSF has online for the Chetzemoka, the Island Sky is about 60 feet longer than the Chetz, and 24 feet wider. It's also about 1,400 tons heavier, nearly 1.75 times the weight of the Chetz. And the passenger cabin that was stated elsewhere to be the same capacity as the Chetz actually carries about 300 fewer people - 450 vs. 750. Car capacity, on the other hand, is a little higher at 125 vs. 64. I couldn't find anything online about the Island Sky's draft. Jody Here's your answer according to this: www.vicship.com/docs/Western%20Mariner%20-%20Feb%202009%20-%20Island%20Sky.pdfLength overall - 328 feet Length waterline - 323 feet Beam - 88.5 feet Draft fully loaded - 15.75 feet By my judgment, I think her cabin is shorter than the CHETZY's. But, it's considerably wider. Interesting to note, our 328 foot ISSAQUAH ferries are 79 feet wide, five of them can carry one less car than the ISLAND SKY. MV ISSAQUAH Length overall - 328 feet Beam - 79 feet Draft - 16.5 feet MV CHETZEMOKA Length overall - 274 feet Beam - 64 feet Draft - about 11 feet |
|
|
|
Post by Kahloke on Jan 25, 2010 11:17:32 GMT -8
Interesting to note, while our 328 foot ISSAQUAH ferries are 79 feet wide, five of them can carry five more cars than the ISLAND SKY. Actually, the 5 Issaquah-Class vessels with the gallery decks only carry 124 vehicles, so that's 1 less than Island Sky. This information comes directly from WSF's Fleet page: www.wsdot.wa.gov/Ferries/yourwsf/ourfleet/Issaquah.htm |
|
FNS
Voyager
The Empire Builder train of yesteryear in HO scale
Posts: 4,957
|
Post by FNS on Jan 25, 2010 13:20:47 GMT -8
Interesting to note, while our 328 foot ISSAQUAH ferries are 79 feet wide, five of them can carry five more cars than the ISLAND SKY. Actually, the 5 Issaquah-Class vessels with the gallery decks only carry 124 vehicles, so that's 1 less than Island Sky. This information comes directly from WSF's Fleet page: www.wsdot.wa.gov/Ferries/yourwsf/ourfleet/Issaquah.htmThanks for the catch! Made my correction. It actually depends on the variable load factors and how many small and large cars are on their decks. The more smaller cars are on board, the more she is carrying. It's vice versa for larger cars. Add trucks and buses and there will be another load variation. It's amazing how the mates direct boarding cars to their lanes. |
|
|
|
Post by Barnacle on Jan 25, 2010 14:47:40 GMT -8
I've always wanted to sort it by color, but I suspect I'd run into trouble on a multi-destination sailing.
|
|
|
|
Post by Barnacle on Jan 25, 2010 14:49:11 GMT -8
The Island Sky's passenger cabin is probably just as big as the Chetzemoka's, and it has one wheelhouse. Here's a photo example of said ship: Is that bridge too high up for a ship like the C'Moka? It's a weight consideration for stability. The higher above the keel, the greater effect the weight has. Picture if you will a classic mechanical metronome. The further up the bar the weight is, the slower and more pronounced the swing. |
|
|
|
Post by Barnacle on Jan 25, 2010 16:26:33 GMT -8
I think I know what the problem is. With a center wheelhouse, those WSF navigators might too easily lose they're sense of direction, and make the ship go astern instead of forward when they are docking. They can't have any rear facing windows in the wheelhouse, so that they can properly know which direction the bow is, because that is the only direction they can see out through the windows ;D. Okay, bub. Gloves off. Setting aside for a moment that we have a single-pilothouse vessel--the Hiyu--I greatly resent, joking or otherwise, any implication about the lack of competence displayed by WSF officers. Some of my co-workers are the finest boathandlers I've ever sailed with. I assure you it's a bit more complicated than the rail boats at Disneyland, or even driving a car. I will match my credentials against yours any day. |
|
|
|
Post by whidbeyislandguy on Jan 26, 2010 0:19:26 GMT -8
I think I know what the problem is. With a center wheelhouse, those WSF navigators might too easily lose they're sense of direction, and make the ship go astern instead of forward when they are docking. They can't have any rear facing windows in the wheelhouse, so that they can properly know which direction the bow is, because that is the only direction they can see out through the windows ;D. Okay, bub. Gloves off. Setting aside for a moment that we have a single-pilothouse vessel--the Hiyu--I greatly resent, joking or otherwise, any implication about the lack of competence displayed by WSF officers. Some of my co-workers are the finest boathandlers I've ever sailed with. I assure you it's a bit more complicated than the rail boats at Disneyland, or even driving a car. I will match my credentials against yours any day. Now now children Barnacle You Go steer the ferryboats come home from work relax and have a Cold one.. (damn that sounds good I should join you)  And Mill Bay finish-up grade school go to a merchant marine school and get 10 years of working on ferries after you go to sea and on a Steam ship for a few yeas.  I would say WSF doesn't because.... A. They really are not more efficient and the designs don't work for our runs. B. WSF doesn't use single ended boats either. (We got rid of our last ones,while BCF was still a baby in the world of ferry systems) They really are not efficient for us. Mind you, your single ended Boats today are really nice... C. WSF is trying to Standardize our fleet, not make it a pick a mix... Now back to the real subject at hand...... ;D   |
|
Jody
Chief Steward
Ferry Foamer
Posts: 152
|
Post by Jody on Jan 26, 2010 0:51:57 GMT -8
Interesting to see she's got horns already. Frankly, I'm a bit shocked by that... I would have thought they'd be installed later to avoid any damage. But there they are in your second picture. Thanks for sharing!
Jody
|
|
Mill Bay
Voyager
Long Suffering Bosun
Posts: 2,887
|
Post by Mill Bay on Jan 26, 2010 15:11:32 GMT -8
Okay, bub. Gloves off. Setting aside for a moment that we have a single-pilothouse vessel--the Hiyu--I greatly resent, joking or otherwise, any implication about the lack of competence displayed by WSF officers. Some of my co-workers are the finest boathandlers I've ever sailed with. I assure you it's a bit more complicated than the rail boats at Disneyland, or even driving a car. I will match my credentials against yours any day. Now now children Barnacle You go steer the ferryboats come home from work relax and have a Cold one.. (damn that sounds good I should join you) ...finish-up grade school go to a merchant Marian school and get 10 years of working on ferries after you go to sea and on a Steam ship for a few yeas. Looks like I'm not the only one... what's Marian school? In favor of Barnacle's case, though... I've never been to Disneyland, and could care less about ever going there, so I wouldn't know about the rail boats, but I'd probably find them just as childish as he does. In addition to that, I could probably come up with more than a couple people who also question my ability to drive. Driving is actually a particularly complicated skill set, so I imagine that being able to steer a ferry is actually a far more fulfilling activity. |
|
FNS
Voyager
The Empire Builder train of yesteryear in HO scale
Posts: 4,957
|
Post by FNS on Jan 26, 2010 20:48:22 GMT -8
Don't know if anyone of you have been noticing this. There is a design similarity between the late redone KLICKITAT and the new CHETZEMOKA.   If you notice the item in the green circles, the new CHETZY has that "KLICKITAT-ness" in her design. The KLICK offered her navigators inside access to her wheelhouses. The CHETZY will offer the same. |
|
Jody
Chief Steward
Ferry Foamer
Posts: 152
|
Post by Jody on Jan 30, 2010 15:22:44 GMT -8
I'm guessing this is a stairway access from the upper passenger level? I think I recall seeing something like that on the deck plans that WSF posted online. I hadn't related it to the boats they are replacing. Interesting catch and analysis.
J
|
|
