|
Post by Mike C on Jul 14, 2012 11:43:52 GMT -8
I am having some trouble understanding the major capacity upgrades to the terminal when they are maintaining the same capacity of the route. Logic would dictate to me that if you're expecting an increase in traffic, you would get a larger vessel...
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,177
|
Post by Neil on Jul 14, 2012 15:20:48 GMT -8
I am having some trouble understanding the major capacity upgrades to the terminal when they are maintaining the same capacity of the route. Logic would dictate to me that if you're expecting an increase in traffic, you would get a larger vessel... I suppose it's to eliminate the line-up up the hill, but they already partially addressed that issue a few years back when they put in an extra lane just for ferry traffic. BC Ferries obviously has a few more discretionary dollars than we've been led to believe. I hope they're not under the impression that a holding compound will placate islanders after the loss of jobs on Denman.
|
|
|
Post by lmtengs on Jul 14, 2012 22:49:02 GMT -8
BC Ferries obviously has a few more discretionary dollars than we've been led to believe. I hope they're not under the impression that a holding compound will placate islanders after the loss of jobs on Denman. I was thinking about just that while washing dishes for seven hours tonight at work. Why is BC Ferries spending millions 'improving' an already functioning system when they have three vessels immediately in dire need of replacement and another whole bunch that'll be needing replacement in the next decade and a half? Do they have localized budgets or something? That could explain it. Somewhat like the education system: the languages department at my school had a budget surplus this year, so they spent the surplus money by hiring painters to paint uplifting messages in fancy fonts framed by cherry blossoms all down the languages corridor at my school, while the teachers are teaching students with 'Smart' whiteboards which are hooked up to the teachers' computer and projector. Meanwhile in the English department, students are reading off coverless, coffee-stained, tattered, thirty year old copies of Romeo and Juliet missing numerous pages throughout while the English teachers are writing on standard whiteboards, stealing whiteboard markers (which, because there's no money in the English department's budget for them, they pay for with their own money) from the classroom next-door when they run out. Is BCF in a similar financial situation?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 15, 2012 16:55:52 GMT -8
Doesn't make much sense, but then again, gaining access to a fenced off or gated off site using creative false pretenses and without approval or permission doesn't make much sense either. Doesn't make sense at all. You would think Christy Clark would step in and veto the project altogether to order BCF to invest in reducing fares as a way to gain political points. But who knows. Maybe that is on her agenda for September, to scrap the project at the deadline in order to be as close to the election as possible. I agree with you on the LNG idea, it could create good jobs (do I sound like a politician... ) and obviously greatly reduce fuel expenses. The cable-ferry cash could also be put towards building new minor vessels. I'm no expert in the cable-ferry or LNG field, but common sense has me thinking that rolling out LNG as a pilot project on ONE vessel, then if succesful, on other vessels- would be cheaper in the long run than building a cable ferry and necessary the infrastructure.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 24, 2012 12:46:15 GMT -8
Why doesn't BC Ferries build two cable ferries the same size, 50 cars, for Buckley Bay to Demman Island during the summer operated both ferries on the same schedule and Christmas holidays and during the winter one ferry sails 7 days week and bring the second online from 12 pm to 6 pm during Friday to Sunday? This could be good for refits and if one is out service and operated on Shuttle mode from 12 pm to 6 pm during Friday to Sunday and 7 days a week on the current schedule in the winter.
|
|
|
Post by Kahloke on Jul 24, 2012 13:05:25 GMT -8
Why doesn't BC Ferries build two cable ferries the same size, 50 cars, for Buckley Bay to Demman Island during the summer operated both ferries on the same schedule and Christmas holidays and during the winter one ferry sails 7 days week and bring the second online from 12 pm to 6 pm during Friday to Sunday? This could be good for refits and if one is out service and operated on Shuttle mode from 12 pm to 6 pm during Friday to Sunday and 7 days a week on the current schedule in the winter. I know very little about cable ferries, but wouldn't you need two completely different sets of cables separated out some distance so the two vessels don't collide on their respective paths, and with that, wouldn't you need two berths on each end to accommodate that second vessel and, essentially, second route (path)? The only cable ferry I have ever been on is a single-vessel operation, so like I said, my knowledge in this area is limited, but what you are proposing sounds expensive - much more so than what BC Ferries is looking at.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 24, 2012 13:11:46 GMT -8
Why doesn't BC Ferries build two cable ferries the same size, 50 cars, for Buckley Bay to Demman Island during the summer operated both ferries on the same schedule and Christmas holidays and during the winter one ferry sails 7 days week and bring the second online from 12 pm to 6 pm during Friday to Sunday? This could be good for refits and if one is out service and operated on Shuttle mode from 12 pm to 6 pm during Friday to Sunday and 7 days a week on the current schedule in the winter. I know very little about cable ferries, but wouldn't you need two completely different sets of cables separated out some distance so the two vessels don't collide on their respective paths, and with that, wouldn't you need two berths on each end to accommodate that second vessel and, essentially, second route (path)? The only cable ferry I have ever been on is a single-vessel operation, so like I said, my knowledge in this area is limited, but what you are proposing sounds expensive - much more so than what BC Ferries is looking at. U would have put two cables path. Docks don't. But if Bc ferries puts two vessel they could talk New Bruswicks because I know they have some routes like my idea. It could be cheaper because if they do it in future it could much more money do it.
|
|
|
Post by Mike C on Jul 24, 2012 15:18:15 GMT -8
I know very little about cable ferries, but wouldn't you need two completely different sets of cables separated out some distance so the two vessels don't collide on their respective paths, and with that, wouldn't you need two berths on each end to accommodate that second vessel and, essentially, second route (path)? The only cable ferry I have ever been on is a single-vessel operation, so like I said, my knowledge in this area is limited, but what you are proposing sounds expensive - much more so than what BC Ferries is looking at. U would have put two cables path. Docks don't. But if Bc ferries puts two vessel they could talk New Bruswicks because I know they have some routes like my idea. It could be cheaper because if they do it in future it could much more money do it. In what I could make out in your post, I saw the words "New Brunswick". So I hit Google. And I found the Westfield Ferry, which appears to have a single cable ferry, with a second vessel available for peak periods, as you indicated. In the photo, it does not appear that the auxilary vessel is a cable ferry, but I could be wrong - judge for yourself: www.gnb.ca/0113/ferries/ferries-e.asp#F60I don't see how this would be possible without having two seperate berths... Seems like a rather costly initiative, and would probably be more cost effective to just build a bigger boat to begin with, but what do I know?
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,177
|
Post by Neil on Jul 24, 2012 16:52:06 GMT -8
U would have put two cables path. Docks don't. But if Bc ferries puts two vessel they could talk New Bruswicks because I know they have some routes like my idea. It could be cheaper because if they do it in future it could much more money do it. In what I could make out in your post, I saw the words "New Brunswick". So I hit Google. And I found the Westfield Ferry, which appears to have a single cable ferry, with a second vessel available for peak periods, as you indicated. In the photo, it does not appear that the auxilary vessel is a cable ferry, but I could be wrong - judge for yourself: www.gnb.ca/0113/ferries/ferries-e.asp#F60I don't see how this would be possible without having two seperate berths... Seems like a rather costly initiative, and would probably be more cost effective to just build a bigger boat to begin with, but what do I know? There will be one fifty car ferry. That's been the plan since this project was announced. BC Ferries is trying to cut operating costs on the route. How the notion of going to two ferries fits into that reality, I can't imagine.
|
|
|
Post by uricanejack on Jul 30, 2012 23:10:09 GMT -8
HiBC Ferries are still going full ahead with the cable ferry. Why?. The Commissioner told them to . Why? Pressure from a special interest group who had a thing for cable ferries and thought they could run one. Oddly nobody from the initial pressure group put in a proposal but the commissioner got the bug and wants the study so BC Ferries has to spend oodles of money to do a feasibility study of a plan they don’t really want anything to do with. Why? If the commissioner says so it’s a requirement of the Coastal Ferry Act.
Now the. Feasibility study has been done and it would appear it is technically possible and surprise it may even be feasible. Depending upon how you define feasible. BC Ferries still not overly enthusiastic but commissioner say keep going. The original proponents of the idea have long since dropped out. But the Band wagon is rolling along. The sceptical senior managers are hearing from their Terminal Engineering Department. We can be world leaders, furthest ever, new technology, it will be great, Don’t worry about transport Canada it’s a gondola not a ship, it will be great, we will be world leaders.
Unfortunately these same advisors thought the fast cats were a great idea as well. So if I am a wee bit sceptical please forgive me.
So now we are at the request for proposal part. There is more than one way to make a proposal.
1 come up with proposal to do the whole thing Lock Stock and Both Smoking Barrels. Take on all the risk and financial burden of designing building and operating the new cable ferry. What do you want to bet nobody is going to be stupid enough to do that?
2 Come up with a proposal to do a partial Lock Stock and Barrel lots of help and input from the ferries but you still take on the financial Burdon of building and operating the thing. Still a pretty big risk. What are the chances somebody will propose this?
3 leave it to BC Ferries to do all the studies design and planning take on the financial risk of designing and building the New world leading technology. And put in a Turn Key proposal. Once you have committed yourselves and built the thing and are stuck with it because you cant afford to do anything else. I can run it cheaper than you Bid. Well that’s the one the smart guy will bid on. His name is Grahame Clark he already operates several small ferry routes. You may not realise they are BC Ferry routes because they are privately run. E.g. Lasquiti. By The way he operates Harbour Ferries and the new float plane terminal which the float planes wont use. One of the new terminals at YVR is named after him. And his brother Robert Clark is one of the Million Dollar Managers at BC Ferries.
At the End of the Day a private operator will make a profit. Not necessarily a bad thing. The Islanders and Tax payers will have to pay for it of course. Christy Clarke or whoever the premier is will get a great photo opp. The yes men will continue saying Its great, its new technology, we are world leaders And the BC ferry user and tax payer will be stuck with the bill.
In the End common sense and practicality have absolutely nothing to do with it. Even David Hann thought this idea was a joke to begin with.
The real Joke. They are actually going o do it.
In all this nobody has thought to say. A minor K class vessel burns less than 100 Litres of fuel per hour with a crew of 5 or 6..
How much could you possibly save.. And how could this saving be greater than the amortised financial cost of the investment per year..
But like I said common sense has nothing to do with it.
As you can guess I am both cynical and I like real Ferries which are actual ships not Gondolas.
Uricanejack
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 31, 2012 15:32:43 GMT -8
HiBC Ferries are still going full ahead with the cable ferry. Why?. The Commissioner told them to . Why? Pressure from a special interest group who had a thing for cable ferries and thought they could run one. Oddly nobody from the initial pressure group put in a proposal but the commissioner got the bug and wants the study so BC Ferries has to spend oodles of money to do a feasibility study of a plan they don’t really want anything to do with. Why? If the commissioner says so it’s a requirement of the Coastal Ferry Act. Now the. Feasibility study has been done and it would appear it is technically possible and surprise it may even be feasible. Depending upon how you define feasible. BC Ferries still not overly enthusiastic but commissioner say keep going. The original proponents of the idea have long since dropped out. But the Band wagon is rolling along. The sceptical senior managers are hearing from their Terminal Engineering Department. We can be world leaders, furthest ever, new technology, it will be great, Don’t worry about transport Canada it’s a gondola not a ship, it will be great, we will be world leaders. Unfortunately these same advisors thought the fast cats were a great idea as well. So if I am a wee bit sceptical please forgive me. So now we are at the request for proposal part. There is more than one way to make a proposal. 1 come up with proposal to do the whole thing Lock Stock and Both Smoking Barrels. Take on all the risk and financial burden of designing building and operating the new cable ferry. What do you want to bet nobody is going to be stupid enough to do that? 2 Come up with a proposal to do a partial Lock Stock and Barrel lots of help and input from the ferries but you still take on the financial Burdon of building and operating the thing. Still a pretty big risk. What are the chances somebody will propose this? 3 leave it to BC Ferries to do all the studies design and planning take on the financial risk of designing and building the New world leading technology. And put in a Turn Key proposal. Once you have committed yourselves and built the thing and are stuck with it because you cant afford to do anything else. I can run it cheaper than you Bid. Well that’s the one the smart guy will bid on. His name is Grahame Clark he already operates several small ferry routes. You may not realise they are BC Ferry routes because they are privately run. E.g. Lasquiti. By The way he operates Harbour Ferries and the new float plane terminal which the float planes wont use. One of the new terminals at YVR is named after him. And his brother Robert Clark is one of the Million Dollar Managers at BC Ferries. At the End of the Day a private operator will make a profit. Not necessarily a bad thing. The Islanders and Tax payers will have to pay for it of course. Christy Clarke or whoever the premier is will get a great photo opp. The yes men will continue saying Its great, its new technology, we are world leaders And the BC ferry user and tax payer will be stuck with the bill. In the End common sense and practicality have absolutely nothing to do with it. Even David Hann thought this idea was a joke to begin with. The real Joke. They are actually going o do it. In all this nobody has thought to say. A minor K class vessel burns less than 100 Litres of fuel per hour with a crew of 5 or 6.. How much could you possibly save.. And how could this saving be greater than the amortised financial cost of the investment per year.. But like I said common sense has nothing to do with it. As you can guess I am both cynical and I like real Ferries which are actual ships not Gondolas. It could go in two ways. 1)Stupid. waste money.Breaks a lot. Taxpayers and Islanders DO NOT LIKE THE IDEA. 2.) Great idea. Saves money, helps protect the environment. Gives Hornby Island to Denman Island the Qunista which is bigger. Peolpe on Hornby Island will be Happy to have a bigger vessel. All BC Ferries needs to do to get my second way is cable depth is reasonable depth for the cable. The designs of the vessel. TC says she is a ferry and have less crew to operate with. The cable is somewhat salt water proffer or change the cable two times a year.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 1, 2012 8:42:13 GMT -8
The cable ferry project is not as 'environmentally friendly' as BC Ferries seems to want us to believe. Sure, it will result in fuel savings, but what about all the waste that the conventional docks will create? The dock at Buckley Bay was just replaced 6 years ago, and now they're gonna throw it out 5 years after the cable ferry comes into service.
Another disadvantage of the cable-ferry: it can NOT rescue any another boats in distress.
IMO the cable ferry is a 'lose-lose' situation.
|
|
KE7JFF
Chief Steward
Posts: 106
|
Post by KE7JFF on Aug 8, 2012 0:43:52 GMT -8
Pretty much rest of the world, cable ferries are considered "limited navigation vessels" by most maritime agencies and can be staffed differently than regular vessels but I am surprised that someone would actually put a cable ferry down there on that water....
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on Nov 23, 2012 10:25:03 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Nov 23, 2012 10:36:04 GMT -8
And for those of you who like pictures better than boring business details, the above link has a diagram of the design concept of the Cable-Queen. - and also of the terminal locations, in relation to the current docks. ----------- ps: thread title changed.
|
|
|
Post by Curtis on Nov 23, 2012 11:26:44 GMT -8
Now that this project has the Green Light, it's going to be fun seeing how it unfolds. The Cable Ferry is definitely an interesting design, Kulshan meets Q Barge that's for sure. One thing I don't understand though is that the Rescue Boat appears to be on it's own separate platform in this design... probably will make more sense once we get another rendering of the design. Looking at the Cable Ferry Track, it looks like Denman West's Holding Lot is going to be expanded for this. Probably for the best since BCF appears to be reducing the amount of roadside used as their holding area.
On a lower note, looks like BC Ferries' plan to retire the Tenaka when this Cable Ferry enters service has got the green light too... on the other hand, BCF would gain the Quinitsa as a regular relief vessel... Or the Kahloke depending on which vessel they want on Denman-Hornby. Perhaps a Summer/Winter Tandem? Considering how many times the Tenaka and Kahloke had to go into Shuttle Mode over the Summer, it might be a solution to have the Quinitsa do the run in Summer and the Kahloke in the Winter.
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Nov 23, 2012 11:47:04 GMT -8
On a lower note, looks like BC Ferries' plan to retire the Tenaka when this Cable Ferry enters service has got the green light too... on the other hand, BCF would gain the Quinitsa as a regular relief vessel... Or the Kahloke depending on which vessel they want on Denman-Hornby. Perhaps a Summer/Winter Tandem? Considering how many times the Tenaka and Kahloke had to go into Shuttle Mode over the Summer, it might be a solution to have the Quinitsa do the run in Summer and the Kahloke in the Winter. ...just wait until they try to run Kahloke as a refit-replacement ship on the Cortes run during winter. ouch.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 23, 2012 17:31:55 GMT -8
Just wait until they try to run Kahloke as a refit-replacement ship on the Cortes run during winter. ouch. Yeah I do not see the TC will allow the Kahloke to run on the Heriot Bay-Whaletown route.
|
|
|
Post by Cat320DL on Nov 23, 2012 17:59:10 GMT -8
Wow a 50 car cable ferry. That is the biggest cable ferry I have ever heard of.
Kyle
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,177
|
Post by Neil on Nov 28, 2012 14:28:53 GMT -8
www.canada.com/Ferries+expected+face+Denman+residents/7614406/story.htmlThe above article quotes Mike Corrigan as stating that the cable ferry project will cost $35 million, and will save BC Ferries a total of $1.8 million a year in fuel, labour, and associated costs. That means that it will take approximately nineteen years before they make back the cost of this project in savings. That's assuming there are no glitches that would add to their costs. And even if everything goes smoothly, from BC Ferries' standpoint, after nineteen years, islanders will still be locked into service by a fifty car capacity vessel. The NDP has expressed concerns over this project and the bogus consultations with the public, but have not indicated they'll do anything to stop it.
|
|
|
Post by compdude787 on Feb 24, 2013 15:03:40 GMT -8
The whole cable ferry idea has always seemed strange to me. First of all, it's going to be operating on a much longer route than any other cable ferry, though that's not the biggest of my concerns. What concerns me more is that this cable ferry is going to have the same capacity as its predecessor, which doesn't allow for growth. That and they're going to be shifting the Quinitsa to the Denman-Hornby Island route. If both ferries will be running on the same frequency of trips, the fact that the cable ferry doesn't carry more than 50 cars means the also 50-car Quinitsa will never be at capacity since of course not all the cars on the Denman Island ferry are going to Hornby Island. Correct me if I'm wrong, but from the comments I've read on this thread, it seems that a 50-car ferry is not enough for that route. Why didn't they use some brains and make this cable ferry have a larger car capacity?
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Feb 26, 2013 9:43:22 GMT -8
A new name for this thread, and a move to the new vessel section of the forum.
Here's a summary quote, from BCFS's 3rd Quarter MD&A report
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,177
|
Post by Neil on Feb 26, 2013 10:37:48 GMT -8
A new name for this thread, and a move to the new vessel section of the forum. Here's a summary quote, from BCFS's 3rd Quarter MD&A report At a meeting on Hornby Sunday night (about which I'll report more later), a retired BC Ferries officer vowed to continue the fight against this proposal. He is alleging the suppression of consultant reports, through a failure to respond to FOI requests, and he alleges that safety factors such as the size of the cables are only slightly above minimum standards. This project will probably go ahead, but opponents are not yet ready to leave quietly.
|
|
|
Post by compdude787 on Feb 26, 2013 22:29:26 GMT -8
On a lower note, looks like BC Ferries' plan to retire the Tenaka when this Cable Ferry enters service has got the green light too... on the other hand, BCF would gain the Quinitsa as a regular relief vessel... Or the Kahloke depending on which vessel they want on Denman-Hornby. Perhaps a Summer/Winter Tandem? Considering how many times the Tenaka and Kahloke had to go into Shuttle Mode over the Summer, it might be a solution to have the Quinitsa do the run in Summer and the Kahloke in the Winter. ...just wait until they try to run Kahloke as a refit-replacement ship on the Cortes run during winter. ouch. Yeah, how's that gonna work? They really need to have three 30-car, single ended ferries. (EDIT: in the fleet, not just on that one route)
|
|
|
Post by Mike C on Feb 26, 2013 23:12:30 GMT -8
...just wait until they try to run Kahloke as a refit-replacement ship on the Cortes run during winter. ouch. Yeah, how's that gonna work? They really need to have three 30-car, single ended ferries. Three 30 AEQ boats on the Cortes run? The route only requires a single 24 AEQ at this point. Unless you mean we need three 30 AEQ boats in our fleet. Which is the status quo (one of those is a 24). Poor Kahloke, I am genuinely going to feel bad for that ship. And everyone who has to spend 45 minutes on her.
|
|