|
|
Post by Kahloke on Nov 18, 2008 13:18:08 GMT -8
3 ferries at Mukilteo might work. Such a schedule with 4 Island Home vessels could potentially look like this during the summers:
Anacortes - San Juan Islands: Hyak, Kaleetan, Yakima
Anacortes - San Juans - Sidney, BC: Chelan
San Juan Inter Island: Island Home #4
Port Townsend - Keystone: Island Home #1, Island Home #2
Mukilteo - Clinton: Cathlamet, Kitsap, Kittitas
Edmonds - Kingston: Puyallup, Spokane
Seattle - Bainbridge Island: Tacoma, Wenatchee
Seattle - Bremerton: Elwha, Walla Walla
Fauntleroy - Vashon - Southworth: Issaquah, Klahowya, Sealth
Point Defiance - Tahlequah: Island Home #3
Standby: Hiyu, Tillikum
retired: Evergreen State, Rhododendron
|
|
|
|
Post by Barnacle on Nov 18, 2008 15:42:57 GMT -8
Don't encourage them.
Building four Island Home-style boats addresses the needs for, on a practical level, one run. We need to get the 144s building so that we have something to actually follow another Cedar River Group recommendation, which was that the vessels be retired after sixty years of service. It's clear that the CRG doesn't read their own material.
Oh, and another point: if the unload/load time of a Super is taken into consideration, then it quickly follows that any gain in capacity by placing a Super at Mukilteo/Clinton is quickly offset by the extra time it takes to load those boats. Supers are not nearly the "self-loaders" that the Issaquah-class boats are... just ask anyone who rode the boat at Edmonds-Kingston when the venerable Hyak was thrown back into the loop. (I know I'm not strictly following boat-class but bear with me.) The Jumbos, as well as the Issaquahs, all but load themselves. The Supers, owing to their narrow beam, are more time-consuming to load as people have to be pretty much individually coached up against the bulkheads so that ONE side of every car can get an escape rote. They're best left in the San Juans whenever possible, where we have time to attend (and can build it into the schedule).
|
|
|
|
Post by Kahloke on Nov 18, 2008 16:29:51 GMT -8
Oh, and another point: if the unload/load time of a Super is taken into consideration, then it quickly follows that any gain in capacity by placing a Super at Mukilteo/Clinton is quickly offset by the extra time it takes to load those boats. Supers are not nearly the "self-loaders" that the Issaquah-class boats are... just ask anyone who rode the boat at Edmonds-Kingston when the venerable Hyak was thrown back into the loop. (I know I'm not strictly following boat-class but bear with me.) The Jumbos, as well as the Issaquahs, all but load themselves. The Supers, owing to their narrow beam, are more time-consuming to load as people have to be pretty much individually coached up against the bulkheads so that ONE side of every car can get an escape rote. They're best left in the San Juans whenever possible, where we have time to attend (and can build it into the schedule). Additionally, we don't need 2500 passenger ferries at Mukilteo. Besides the San Juans, the Supers also work well at Bremerton where the schedule is somewhat padded (generally, they really don't take the stated 60 minutes to make that crossing). My hypothetical schedule above shows 3 Issaquah's at Mukilteo, but I only did this to show what the fleet deployment could look like with that type of newbuild program. I actually agree with Barnacle - WSF needs to stick with the current plan layed out before them, and build the 2 Island Home Vessels, then the 3 144's. |
|
|
|
Post by whidbeyislandguy on Nov 18, 2008 19:14:21 GMT -8
Oh, and another point: if the unload/load time of a Super is taken into consideration, then it quickly follows that any gain in capacity by placing a Super at Mukilteo/Clinton is quickly offset by the extra time it takes to load those boats. Supers are not nearly the "self-loaders" that the Issaquah-class boats are... just ask anyone who rode the boat at Edmonds-Kingston when the venerable Hyak was thrown back into the loop. (I know I'm not strictly following boat-class but bear with me.) The Jumbos, as well as the Issaquahs, all but load themselves. The Supers, owing to their narrow beam, are more time-consuming to load as people have to be pretty much individually coached up against the bulkheads so that ONE side of every car can get an escape rote. They're best left in the San Juans whenever possible, where we have time to attend (and can build it into the schedule). Additionally, we don't need 2500 passenger ferries at Mukilteo. Besides the San Juans, the Supers also work well at Bremerton where the schedule is somewhat padded (generally, they really don't take the stated 60 minutes to make that crossing). My hypothetical schedule above shows 3 Issaquah's at Mukilteo, but I only did this to show what the fleet deployment could look like with that type of newbuild program. I actually agree with Barnacle - WSF needs to stick with the current plan layed out before them, and build the 2 Island Home Vessels, then the 3 144's.  No!! God No! TAKE Issy's away please! ;D Give us the Supers.... I think, most all of us have had enough of the Kittyass and the Crashslamit ..   |
|
|
|
Post by Kahloke on Nov 18, 2008 19:51:46 GMT -8
No, you're stuck with the Issy's forever, and ever, and EVER - Bwaa-Ha-Ha-Ha-Ha (laughing sinisterly)! Actually, Barnacle's right. Loading the Supers at Mukilteo and Clinton in a timely manner, would be difficult to do given the narrow breadth of those vessels, and the way deckhands have to shoe-horn cars in. In my opinion, the best solution is to have two of the new 144's go to Mukilteo, with the first one going to the islands, if the state sticks with their plan, and actually builds 3 of those vessels - at this point, that may be a big if. With that scenario, my ideal summer schedule fleet assignment would look like this:
Anacortes - San Juan Islands: New144 #1, Kaleetan, Yakima
Anacortes - San Juans - Sidney, BC: Chelan
San Juan Inter Island: Sealth
Port Townsend - Keystone: Island Home #1, Island Home #2
Mukilteo - Clinton: New144 #2, New144 #3
Edmonds - Kingston: Puyallup, Spokane
Seattle - Bainbridge Island: Tacoma, Wenatchee
Seattle - Bremerton: Hyak, Walla Walla
Fauntleroy - Vashon - Southworth: Cathlamet, Issaquah, Kittitas
Point Defiance - Tahlequah: Klahowya
Standby: Elwha, Hiyu, Kitsap, Tillikum
retired: Evergreen State, Rhododendron
This would keep the Supers in the San Juans and Bremerton, where the extra schedule padding and dwell times suit the loading peculiarities of those vessels, and it would put the newer, higher capacity vessels at Mukilteo, which is badly needed.
|
|
|
|
Post by guest on Nov 18, 2008 20:11:36 GMT -8
Take away the Issaquah's? I beg to differ, i personally can't stand to work on them (engaged/disengaged 25x a dayshift numbs the brain) because they are boring. I realize they had MAJOR teething issues at first but they have become very reliable boats.
I like the plant layout the supers have, even the Elwha with its MANY faults, but i would prefer to see the state spend the public's money on a proven platform (the new generation Issy's), we are supposedly in the business of moving people point A->B, this is not a time to re-invent the wheel in ferry boat design. From little i have seen these Island Home boats seem like cheap ....'s, little value for the money.
|
|
|
|
Post by Barnacle on Nov 18, 2008 20:56:34 GMT -8
My chief complaint with the Elwha is that it has been the victim of experimental surgery one time too many, and it somehow seems like everything they do to the poor old thing to try to fix it only makes it worse. Give me any of the other Supers, any day of the week. I'm not afraid of a telegraph boat.
I don't have any real grumbles with the Issaquahs, save for the noise of those stupid reduction gears. I think they're about the most economic boats we have in the stable in terms of operation. Mostly, I get bored with 'pilothouse control' boats. Telegraphs are a little more challenging. ;D
|
|
FNS
Voyager 
The Empire Builder train of yesteryear in HO scale
Posts: 4,957
|
Post by FNS on Nov 18, 2008 21:37:50 GMT -8
No, you're stuck with the Issy's forever, and ever, and EVER - Bwaa-Ha-Ha-Ha-Ha (laughing sinisterly)! Actually, Barnacle's right. Loading the Supers at Mukilteo and Clinton in a timely manner, would be difficult to do given the narrow breadth of those vessels, and the way deckhands have to shoe-horn cars in. In my opinion, the best solution is to have two of the new 144's go to Mukilteo, with the first one going to the islands, if the state sticks with their plan, and actually builds 3 of those vessels - at this point, that may be a big if. With that scenario, my ideal summer schedule fleet assignment would look like this: Anacortes - San Juan Islands: New144 #1, Kaleetan, Yakima Anacortes - San Juans - Sidney, BC: Chelan San Juan Inter Island: Sealth Port Townsend - Keystone: Island Home #1, Island Home #2Mukilteo - Clinton: New144 #2, New144 #3Edmonds - Kingston: Puyallup, Spokane Seattle - Bainbridge Island: Tacoma, Wenatchee Seattle - Bremerton: Hyak, Walla Walla Fauntleroy - Vashon - Southworth: Cathlamet, Issaquah, Kittitas Point Defiance - Tahlequah: Klahowya Standby: Elwha, Hiyu, Kitsap, Tillikum retired: Evergreen State, Rhododendron This would keep the Supers in the San Juans and Bremerton, where the extra schedule padding and dwell times suit the loading peculiarities of those vessels, and it would put the newer, higher capacity vessels at Mukilteo, which is badly needed. I agree with having the two new 144 ferries on the Mukilteo run 100 percent! With an elevator at each end on these well designed new ferries, the Mukilteo run would be the best ADA ferry run in the whole country. Solo wheelchair folks (using transit and not using cars) would board on the Main Deck and would proceed to the elevator without obstruction, go up to either the Saloon Deck or the Sun Deck, stroll to the other end, then down the elevator at that end, then off the ferry with ease. Perfect for this run with a crossing time of 15 minutes or less. On the current ferries, they must board first, go to the south side amidships elevator, go to the Saloon Deck, then use the same elevator to return to the Main Deck, and wait for cars to clear (by then, they'll miss the bus). I would, however, place the KLAHOWYA or TILLIKUM on the Inter-Island service and place the SEALTH on the Tahlequah run. There's been an issue on the diesel-electric propulsion system on the TILLY-Class on that short run. The SEALTH has CP propellers. I don't think they'd ever move the throttle up hardly aboard the SEALTH on the Tahlequah run. I think they can use just one engine driving both propellers during normal conditions there at Tahlequah. Back to the topic of the heading above, the new Keystone ferries will have an elevator at each end as well. |
|
|
|
Post by SS Shasta on Nov 19, 2008 0:11:55 GMT -8
Risking a trip to the dog house........... ;D
It seems like the main issue is going to be money or the lack of it to build all of these new vessels under the current economic conditions. The Governor has made a clear pledge not to increase taxes and hopefully will hold to that pledge. With this situation in mind it would seem logical to:
1. Build the two Island Home class vessels as planned to solve the Port Townsend/Keystone issue once and for all. Shift necessary funds from the 144's to finish this project.
2. Build two 144 class vessels with the remaining construction funds keeping in mind that the costs of these vessels have likely increased too.
3. Retain MV Evergreen State in the active fleet as the inter-island vessel, and assign MV Sealth or MV Kitsap as the 3rd vessel on the Edmonds/Kingston route during the summer months.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kahloke on Nov 19, 2008 9:30:23 GMT -8
Even if only 2 144-car ferries get built, instead of 3, I would imagine they will still retire the Evergreen State. It just leaves the system with fewer standby vessels, but that is still marginally better than today's situation of no reserve boats.
|
|
|
|
Post by Barnacle on Nov 19, 2008 10:20:38 GMT -8
Well, SS Shasta, I hope you're sitting down, because I'm going to agree with you (except maybe on the third-vessel-at-Kingston point).
I think your construction plan is the least odious option (assuming we can't get all three 144-car boats) because building more than the necessary amount of 65-car boats to replace the service levels provided by Steel-Electrics on a regular basis is ludicrous. It's regressive. As fond as many folk are/were of the Steel-Electric class, those boats weren't that useful to WSF. The Illahee was too small as the interislander for six months of the year; it's already been proven that a 90-car boat at Tahlequah/Point Def is MORE than welcome, taking some pressure off the north end. We need a grand total of two Island Homers, no more.
I'm even going to do an about-face on the idea of "extra service" on the Edmonds-Kingston run and state that an extra vessel to operate on an unscheduled, as-needed basis would probably be useful. Unfortunately we really don't have the personnel available to man it at this point. Most of our on-call staff don't have licenses or ratings sufficient to jockey up a crew at will.
I'm also going to defend the Evergreen State for reasons other than unabashedly sentimental: the old girl's stil turning in a good day's work, and she's still pretty sound. Besides, with all the internal workings in play at WSF, I wouldn't be surprised to see the dedicated inter-island boat disappear. It's a logistical and crewing nighmare.
***BREAKING NEWS***
It has now been estimated that Washington State's next biennial budget will now face a $4.6 billion dollar shortfall.
That may render most if not all of our conversation regarding the 144-car boats moot. Brace for impact, gentlemen...
|
|
|
|
Post by BreannaF on Nov 19, 2008 10:46:15 GMT -8
It seems like the main issue is going to be money or the lack of it to build all of these new vessels under the current economic conditions. The Governor has made a clear pledge not to increase taxes and hopefully will hold to that pledge. With this situation in mind it would seem logical.... You know, I just hate it when politicians box themselves in like that. I think we should consider tax increases VERY carefully and use them sparingly. But we don't live in the same economy that we did just a few months ago. We are facing a lot of unemployment, and we are facing a highway system and a ferry system that need a fair amount of maintenance to keep them from crumbling. Given that, would it be too much to ask that the governor consider adding a couple of cents per gallon to the 46 cents per gallon (combined Federal and State) that we pay for gas in Washington. that would do a lot to solve our infrastructure problems, and hey, you were paying over $4.00 per gallon for the stuff just three months ago. Adding a nickel to the two bucks we are paying now would barely be noticed. But it would be returned to us in the form of a dividend -- we would have suitable roads and ferries to get around on. Naw.... it makes too much sense. ***BREAKING NEWS*** It has now been estimated that Washington State's next biennial budget will now face a $4.6 billion dollar shortfall. That may render most if not all of our conversation regarding the 144-car boats moot. Brace for impact, gentlemen... Yup, sadly, you're probably correct on that.  |
|
|
|
Post by old_wsf_fan on Nov 19, 2008 21:36:10 GMT -8
I hope two of the new Island-Home boats get built. That route needs two vessels not one. Possible solutions to the problem: Delay building of the 144's for 2-3 years and fund the most pressing need in the system, Pt. Townsend/Keystone boats. Build 1 of the 144's only, retire the Rhody, switch vessels within the system and build the PT/K boats. Or hire another consulting firm to fuel another endless debate on how to solve the problem.........For which this State seems to excel at! |
|
|
|
Post by Kahloke on Nov 19, 2008 21:46:23 GMT -8
I agree. I'm certainly no expert on these issues, but my prediction is they will at least build the 2 Port Townsend ferries, possibly diverting more money from the budget slated for the 144's. Getting those two boats built seems critical, and I don't see the state abandoning that effort. The future of the 144's, on the other hand, is a lot less clear. I wouldn't be surprised if that project gets deferred, and quite possibly for more than just 2-3 years, maybe more like 5-8 years. Who knows? What was that line at the end of Terminator 2?...."the future is unwritten?"
|
|
|
|
Post by chokai on Nov 19, 2008 22:01:23 GMT -8
I wouldn't be surprised if that project gets deferred, and quite possibly for more than just 2-3 years, maybe more like 5-8 years. Who knows? What was that line at the end of Terminator 2?...."the future is unwritten?" Heh. This is where you rely on Patty Murray being the Senate Transportation committee chair to try to find you some $$$. I know there has been rumblings of federal relief for PT already on several occasions and the idea of spending a whole lot of money on infrastructure projects as a stimulus has been gaining favor amongst the incoming politicians right now. Heck someone was talking about bringing back the WPA the other day... Whether you agree with it or not it could really benefit the DOT and WSF if it comes to pass. After all ship building is exactly the kind of business they *love* to aid in times of bad economic news. I'm remembering that the bus tunnel in Seattle was built during less than ideal economic times and had huge cost overruns.. It's fairly important to the functioning of downtown at this point. |
|
FNS
Voyager
The Empire Builder train of yesteryear in HO scale
Posts: 4,957
|
Post by FNS on Dec 1, 2008 18:23:06 GMT -8
At long last, a good news release from WSF: *** *** *** New ferry on the way for Port Townsend/Keystone RouteDate: Monday, December 01, 2008 Contact: Marta Coursey, Ferries Division, Director of Communications SEATTLE - Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) Ferries Division announced today that it is awarding a contract to Todd Pacific Shipyards to build one 64-auto ferry. Todd Shipyards submitted a $65.5 million bid last month to build one 64-auto ferry. With the contract award, the new ferry is on an 18-month construction timeline. "Our economy and the people who depend upon this ferry route will greatly benefit from this contract. This award is expected to generate nearly 200 jobs," said Gov. Chris Gregoire. "The locally built ferry will provide reliable auto and passenger service on this critical route." The ferry will serve the Port Townsend to Keystone route that has been without a state-owned auto ferry since the Steel Electric Class ferries were taken out of service in November 2007. Since then, various temporary solutions have been in place, including a leased auto ferry, the Steilacoom II, from Pierce County. “It's important for the long-term health of the ferry system that we get on with the business of building new vessels and replacing our aging ferry fleet," said Paula Hammond, Secretary of Transportation. "These vessels fit with our plan that includes identifying a sustainable long-term funding source to support the ferry system into the future." The new 64-auto ferry will hold up to 750 passengers. The next steps toward construction include a signed contract and contract security returned from Todd Shipyards. Once that is received, the state will issue a notice to proceed, followed by delivery of the vessel 540 days later. "I greatly appreciate the efforts of the Port Townsend and Keystone communities, state lawmakers and Todd Shipyards to get a new vessel into construction," said David Moseley, WSDOT Ferries Division Assistant Secretary. "If there is one thing we know, it's that there will be many challenges ahead to service and replace the state’s aging fleet." For more information on the new vessel program, please visit: www.wsdot.wa.gov/Projects/Ferries/NewVessel/*** *** *** As I said on the Keystone thread, it is wise to build only a single first one of these on an escalated schedule and then have all parties evaluate the performance of the vessel and acceptance of amenities. Then, continue building more of these after making changes, if need be. GET YOUR HARD HATS ON! HERE WE GO!! |
|
|
|
Post by Barnacle on Dec 2, 2008 8:27:39 GMT -8
"Happy" is relative. I appreciate that we are finally on the way for construction; I just hope that the Legislature realizes that giving WSF one boat isn't going to completely solve any problems. They need to shoot the lock off the wallet--and in this economic period, that's a BIG request.
|
|
FNS
Voyager
The Empire Builder train of yesteryear in HO scale
Posts: 4,957
|
Post by FNS on Dec 2, 2008 17:45:24 GMT -8
Here is a report from the South Whidbey Record: *** *** *** UPDATED | State orders new ferry; Nichols to benefit By ROY JACOBSON South Whidbey Record Reporter Nov 29 2008, 8:00 AM The state will order one new ferry for the Keystone-Port Townsend run, state Sen. Mary Margaret Haugen said Wednesday. And Nichols Brothers Boat Builders of Freeland, which a week ago laid off 30 employees, will get a piece of the action. “We’re going to build a ferry. We’re moving forward with one boat,” Haugen, chairwoman of the Senate Transportation Committee, told members of the Island County Council of Governments at its meeting in Coupeville. The state will likely build two additional ferries of the modified Island Home design, Haugen added, and push back construction of new 144-vehicle-capacity ferries. Todd Pacific Shipyards in Seattle, in conjunction with Nichols Brothers, originally submitted a bid to construct two new 64-car high-speed ferries for the Keystone-Port Townsend run. The bid was $65.5 million for one ferry and $124.4 million for two. The state originally projected $84.5 million for two boats. The bid, the only one submitted, was opened by ferry system officials on Nov. 13. “The cost of the new boat is a lot, there’s no question about it,” Haugen told the council, which included representatives from the city of Langley, the ports of South Whidbey and Coupeville and Island County. She said Gov. Christine Gregoire had concerns about the state receiving just one bid, but Haugen noted the state would face other costs if jobs continue to be lost in Washington. Having new vessels built here means jobs, she said. “If we were to build out of state, it would cost you $2 million to bring it here,” Haugen added. The state is looking for a modified version of the Island Home design. Matt Nichols, managing director for business development, said Friday that Nichols Brothers’ share of the contract will be about $6 million, but that the company will negotiate for a bigger piece of the job. “We originally said that was all we could handle, because we were expecting another job,” Nichols said. “Then we didn’t get the other job.” The Freeland shipyard is expected to build the top section of the vessel, including the entire passenger deck and galley, and the pilot houses and machinery compartments for the heating and air-conditioning systems. “It should be a good job,” Nichols said. “Any work right now is good work. When you get a job for sure, it’s hallelujah, let’s go.” Nichols said there would be three or four months of engineering work before additional employees could be added to the project. The Island Home was designed by the Elliott Bay Design Group of Seattle and built by VT Halter Marine Inc., of Moss Point, Mass. The first state vessel is expected to go into service in April 2010, state officials said. The state Department of Transportation ordered new ferries for the Keystone-Port Townsend run after four 80-year-old Steel Electric vessels were pulled from service a year ago by Washington State Ferries because of safety concerns. Haugen said Wednesday the state may eventually build additional Island Home ferries. “We will probably build two more of these boats. We probably will slide the 144s,” she said. “The recommendation is that we don’t need the 144s right now.” It’s good news for the Keystone-Port Townsend route. “That will make this area, this run in particular, very secure,” Haugen said, adding that cuts in service on some routes is currently being discussed in light of the state’s $5.1 billion budget deficit. Nichols Brothers said the recent layoffs were due to a California buyer’s plan to acquire and rebuild existing vessels rather than purchase a new vessel from the Freeland firm. Nichols Brothers had maintained its employment level to allow for training in anticipation of winning that ferry contract. The Golden Gate Bridge, Highway and Transportation District has been looking to buy new high-speed passenger ferries since June 2006. In July, Nichols Brothers submitted a bid of $18.6 million to build one of the ferries. However, the district decided to buy two used ferries, the M/V Snohomish and M/V Chinook, from Washington state for $4 million. The Golden Gate district also plans to spend approximately $19.1 million to refurbish the Washington ferries. Nichols said the company would bid on a portion of the refurbishment contract when it is announced. -South Whidbey Record Reporter Roy Jacobson *** *** *** *** *** *** Below are the major components Todd, Everett, and Nichols are setting up to build.  As you can see, I have some of this in "primer" (before the full paint is applied as well as some hardware). Actual color of the primers will vary, as the saying always goes. The colored hull section is what Todd will build. This major component is steel. The darker gray section is what Everett will build. This is the Main Deck structure. This major component is steel. The lighter gray shows what Nichols is gearing up to build. This is aluminum. Going to be interesting to watch the construction work being done. |
|
|
|
Post by Kahloke on Dec 2, 2008 19:15:32 GMT -8
Your "primered" ferry looks good  I can't say I agree with some of Haugen's comments in the article you posted. I would say we need 2 Island Home-type vessels at the most. It seems like it is a specialized ferry suited to one specific run, with the possible exception of assigning one to inter-island duties in the San Juan's during the winter season. Building a 3rd one for use at Point Defiance-Tahlequah (I'm assuming that's the route they have in mind for that 3rd boat, what with Rhododendron's retirement around the corner) seems short-sighted to me. Are we going to forever condemn that run to a small-capacity vessel? Oh yes, I know 64 cars is more than what Rhododendron carries, but I have heard that the Evergreen-size boats do quite well on this run, and actually siphon some of the traffic from the north Vashon ferries. Besides, we really do need at least one 144-car ferry to start providing relief at Mukilteo, and help disperse some of the other vessels around the system - well, at least one Issy would get released. And, as Barnacle pointed out, putting a Super at Mukilteo, with its narrower beam, won't work very well with the current schedule as it will increase the time it takes to load vehicles. I think I'm starting to agree with some others here: let's build this first boat and see how it does before committing to anything more. |
|
|
|
Post by anomie on Dec 2, 2008 21:02:27 GMT -8
Actually, what Whidbey Island needs is a bridge north of Oak Harbor with a quick connection to I-5.
It is most interesting that this was proposed by Sen. Haugen when she first entered into State politics.
|
|
FNS
Voyager
The Empire Builder train of yesteryear in HO scale
Posts: 4,957
|
Post by FNS on Dec 28, 2008 20:11:50 GMT -8
HERE'S ANOTHER NEWS STORY FROM THE SOUTH WHIDBEY RECORD ON THE NEW FERRY: www.pnwlocalnews.com/whidbey/swr/news/36590804.htmlNichols Brothers ready to go on new state ferry contractBy ROY JACOBSON South Whidbey Record Reporter Dec 24 2008, 8:00 AM Nichols Brothers Boat Builders is ready to begin work on a new ferry for the Keystone-Port Townsend run, but it’s too soon to say when laid-off workers will be called back, said Matt Nichols, managing director for business development. “The ferry contract is in place,” Nichols said. “But we may need to get another job or two before we start thinking about rehiring. “I don’t know what’s going to happen,” he continued. “Things quiet down around the holidays, and they don’t start popping until after New Year’s. We have lots of work, but we’re always looking for more.” In November, Nichols Brothers laid off 30 workers. The layoff was expected to last three months, company officials said at the time, and the remaining 150 employees were assured there would be no further layoffs at this time. Then the state Department of Transportation announced it would go ahead with one new high-speed ferry. It had originally put out a bid for two, at a projected cost of $84.5 million. Todd Pacific Shipyards of Seattle, in conjunction with Nichols Brothers, submitted the only bid; $65.5 million for one ferry and $124.4 million for two. Sen. Mary Margaret Haugen, chairwoman of the Senate Transportation Committee, said last month the state will likely build two additional ferries of the modified Island Home design and push back construction of new 144-vehicle-capacity ferries. Nichols Brothers’ share of the contract for the first ferry will be about $6 million, but Nichols said the company will negotiate for a bigger piece of the job. Nichols Brothers is scheduled to build the top section of the vessel, including the entire passenger deck and galley, and the pilot houses and machinery compartments for the heating and air-conditioning systems. Nichols said the company is trying to determine whether the pilot houses are similar enough to those of previous vessels the company has built, so that work on that portion of the job can begin sooner. “My fear is that the designers have changed it too much,” he said. “If so, we’ll have to wait four or five months for new design work.” The original Island Home ferry was designed by the Elliott Bay Design Group of Seattle and built by VT Halter Marine Inc., of Moss Point, Mass. The original 255-foot-long ferry can carry 76 vehicles and 1,200 passengers. The first state vessel is expected to go into service in April 2010, state officials said. The Department of Transportation ordered new ferries for the Keystone-Port Townsend run after four 80-year-old Steel Electric vessels were pulled from service a year ago by Washington State Ferries because of safety concerns. The original Island Home, operated by the Nantucket Steamship Co., has run the seven-mile, 40-minute route between Woods Hole and Martha’s Vineyard in Massachusetts since March 2007. Washington State Ferries officials traveled back East and determined the ferry would be a suitable design, with modifications, to navigate the shallow conditions on the Keystone-Port Townsend run. Nichols Brothers said the recent layoffs were due to a California buyer’s plan to acquire and rebuild existing vessels rather than purchase a new vessel from the Freeland firm. Nichols Brothers had maintained its employment level to allow for training in anticipation of winning that ferry contract. The Golden Gate Bridge, Highway and Transportation District had been looking to buy new high-speed passenger ferries since June 2006. In July, Nichols Brothers submitted a bid of $18.6 million to build one of the ferries. However, the district decided to buy two used ferries, the M/V Snohomish and M/V Chinook, from Washington state for $4 million. The Golden Gate district also plans to spend about $19.1 million to refurbish the Washington ferries. Nichols said the company would bid on a portion of the refurbishment contract when it is announced. Meanwhile, Nichols Brothers is continuing work on its other contracts. The first of four twin-hulled passenger ferries was delivered earlier this month to the San Francisco Bay area after undergoing sea trials at the Langley Marina. The $8.8 million catamaran, built in partnership with Kivchak Marine Industries of Everett, went to the Bay Area’s Water Emergency Transit Authority. Construction of a second WETA catamaran is under way at the Freeland boat yard, and two more have been ordered, Nichols said. The next catamaran is scheduled for delivery in March, and the other two for late next year. Two additional vessels are being discussed. Meanwhile, the company also is midway through contracts to build five large tugboats. The $10-million tractor vessels are 100 feet long and weigh 85 tons. The third and latest tug was delivered recently to the Minette Bay Co., of Prince Rupert, B.C. The remaining two tugs will be built for BayDelta Marine in the Bay Area. Nichols said the Bay Area firm may order two additional tugs. He said that despite the pinched credit market, all the financing for the current contracts is in place. Meanwhile, the company will continue to pursue other contracts, Nichols said, and is getting ready to bid “on five or six jobs.” “We have several good-looking projects on the horizon,” he said. “The marine industry still looks very strong.” South Whidbey Record Reporter Roy Jacobson |
|
|
|
Post by Barnacle on Dec 28, 2008 21:00:40 GMT -8
I'm no engineer either, but I'm a little nervous about the modifications to the design myself. We all hope that it will work. As long as they don't go and do something stupid like add two extra engines...  |
|
|
|
Post by craig on Dec 29, 2008 21:52:51 GMT -8
You know what? The current problem with any new-build program at the moment is that the State can't sell any bonds because of the Crash.
They are abandoning the 144 program, and the contract for the one Island Home has yet to be signed.
|
|
|
|
Post by SS Shasta on Dec 29, 2008 22:48:48 GMT -8
Why are so many "design changes" necessary for a design that already has a vessel in service? A few modest changes such as removing car deck doors, etc., seem reasonable. Seems like contemporary design changes are so frequent that projects are delayed and there are major cost overruns.
|
|
|
|
Post by Barnacle on Dec 30, 2008 20:26:42 GMT -8
Why are so many "design changes" necessary for a design that already has a vessel in service? A few modest changes such as removing car deck doors, etc., seem reasonable. Seems like contemporary design changes are so frequent that projects are delayed and there are major cost overruns. Making it fit our docks? Security modifications to align with the rest of WSF's security? Extra liferafting? Did the removal of the doors alter the structural integrity of the design? I'm not a naval architect, so I don't know.  |
|
No!! God No! TAKE Issy's away please! ;D Give us the Supers.... I think, most all of us have had enough of the Kittyass and the Crashslamit .. 
I can't say I agree with some of Haugen's comments in the article you posted. I would say we need 2 Island Home-type vessels at the most. It seems like it is a specialized ferry suited to one specific run, with the possible exception of assigning one to inter-island duties in the San Juan's during the winter season. Building a 3rd one for use at Point Defiance-Tahlequah (I'm assuming that's the route they have in mind for that 3rd boat, what with Rhododendron's retirement around the corner) seems short-sighted to me. Are we going to forever condemn that run to a small-capacity vessel? Oh yes, I know 64 cars is more than what Rhododendron carries, but I have heard that the Evergreen-size boats do quite well on this run, and actually siphon some of the traffic from the north Vashon ferries. Besides, we really do need at least one 144-car ferry to start providing relief at Mukilteo, and help disperse some of the other vessels around the system - well, at least one Issy would get released. And, as Barnacle pointed out, putting a Super at Mukilteo, with its narrower beam, won't work very well with the current schedule as it will increase the time it takes to load vehicles. I think I'm starting to agree with some others here: let's build this first boat and see how it does before committing to anything more.
