|
Post by compdude787 on Feb 27, 2013 10:40:56 GMT -8
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). Yeah I meant three 30-car ferries in the fleet, not just on one route. There are two on two routes, plus a 3rd one to serve as a backup not only for the 30-car, single-ended ferries but also for the double-ended ferries. The 30-car backup ferry ought to be a single-ended ferry (raised bow, specifically), so that it can provide backup even on the more open-water routes.
|
|
|
Post by compdude787 on Feb 27, 2013 10:48:02 GMT -8
I posted this comment already, but it seems to have gotten ignored. My points are worth consideration: 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? OTOH, I hope that this ferry is NOT called the "Cable Queen," that's just a lame name. "Denman Queen" sounds better; after all, that's the island the ferry will be sailing to for its whole life.
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Feb 27, 2013 10:53:05 GMT -8
I posted this comment already, but it seems to have gotten ignored. My points are worth consideration: I think that most of your comments had already been discussed in the previous 3 years, in this here thread. That's what I thought when I saw your recent comments. - it's good, because your initial reaction on this strange venture is the same as what the rest of us (and concerned ferry users on those islands) have been saying. ....this shows that there really are significant issues with this concept. If it was obvious to us and to you, why isn't it obvious to BC Ferries? (rhetorical question).
|
|
|
Post by Mike on Feb 27, 2013 10:56:20 GMT -8
I posted this comment already, but it seems to have gotten ignored. My points are worth consideration: 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? OTOH, I hope that this ferry is NOT called the "Cable Queen," that's just a lame name. "Denman Queen" sounds better; after all, that's the island the ferry will be sailing to for its whole life. "Cable Queen" is a joke... Regrettably, BC Ferries stopped using Queen and "Queen of" in the naming of ships in 2003.
|
|
|
Post by Scott (Former Account) on Feb 27, 2013 11:30:34 GMT -8
Considering that this vessel will only serve Route 21, it's likely the name will either be specific to the Denman Island or named after a historical figure from the area. Let's just hope we'll not see a repeat of names that sound like they originated from a drug-induced hallucination. Care to sail aboard the Denman Dream, anyone?
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Feb 27, 2013 11:44:10 GMT -8
Considering that this vessel will only serve Route 21, it's likely the name will either be specific to the Denman Island or named after a historical figure from the area. Welcome aboard the MV Barry Pepper. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barry_Pepper
|
|
|
Post by Mike on Feb 27, 2013 11:47:30 GMT -8
Considering that this vessel will only serve Route 21, it's likely the name will either be specific to the Denman Island or named after a historical figure from the area. Let's just hope we'll not see a repeat of names that sound like they originated from a drug-induced hallucination. Care to sail aboard the Denman Dream, anyone? I was looking forward to riding the Denman Renaissance or the Denman Adventure.
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Feb 27, 2013 11:59:56 GMT -8
In honour of a regular long-time user of that ferry-route: MV "Dung Bomb Transporter" ?
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,177
|
Post by Neil on Feb 27, 2013 13:15:01 GMT -8
In honour of a regular long-time user of that ferry-route: MV " Dung Bomb Transporter" ? R.I.P. Dung Bomb. Gone, and not missed. This isn't a cable ferry post, but since this thread concerns Denman and Hornby, and since this story was a result of the cable controversy, I thought I'd put this here. Sunday night I went to a sparsely attended meeting at the Hornby community hall, to discuss a proposal for a direct Buckley Bay to Shingle Spit ferry route, The proposal came from retired BC Ferries captain Richard Stead. Stead had fourteen years with the Highways ferries and fourteen with BC Ferries, from deckhand to Captain, as well as being VP of the BCFMWU. He is a forty year Hornby resident, and is familiar with all the Denman and Hornby boats since that time. The idea was born out of several factors. One was frustration over BC Ferries' unwillingness to truly consult islanders on their wishes regarding the cable ferry. Another was continuing resentment over Hornbyites being secondary when it comes to the Buckley Bay to Denman route. It was brought up- and is quite true- that the way the routes are set up now, Denmanites in effect 'cut in' the lineup in front of Hornby users. If a Hornbyite is wanting to catch the 2:40 ferry from Denman West to Buckley Bay, they will need to be in line for the 2:00 ferry from Shingle Spit by about 1:50, assuming there is no overload. From that time, it should be considered that they are a BC Ferries passenger, since the drive across Denman is part of the voyage, given how the routes are structured. A Denmanite wanting to catch the same ferry, however, can leave home well after 1:50 and be in the lineup ahead of the Hornby person who was in the system sooner. There's really no way around this, and it certainly is a factor in busy periods. Route 21 is supposed to serve both islands equally, but it doesn't work that way in practise. Another factor prompting the proposal was the difficulty in making further connections to the mainland or to appointments on Vancouver island, particularly in busy season. It was brought out that BC Ferries at one time owned land at Deep Bay, and had planned to operate a ferry from there, stopping at a terminal near the southern end of Denman, and continuing on to Hornby. Whether the Hornby terminal would be at Shingle Spit or perhaps Ford Cove, with a rebuilt road to the Spit, I don't know. BC Ferries sold their Deep Bay property sometime in the '80s. It was also noted that the Quinitsa now is run slower than in the past to save fuel, meaning that in shuttling mode, a round trip takes about 45 minutes, where in the past it might have been 35. Quinitsa also used to have five car lanes, which were re-painted to four, cutting its capacity. Stead proposed to petition BC Ferries to operate a trial route in the off season. If it were after the cable ferry started operation, he suggested using the Quinitsa, supplemented by the Kahloke. Sailing time would be approximately 75 minutes, and he thought the fares would be comparable to current ones. He seemed to think that other boats might be available in future, but clearly, that is not the case. At the end of the meeting, I declined to sign the petition, as did ferries FAC rep Tony Law. The proposal just didn't seem to work. For one thing, BC Ferries would never agree to putting two ferries on a route serving one thousand residents... and you can hardly blame them. The idea of the cable ferry is to save on operating costs, and this revised route 22 would see its costs more than double for labour alone, and would increase considerably for fuel. There could only be one boat on this route, and it would be the Quinitsa. Even with five car lanes, the capacity would be 60 cars leaving Hornby every three hours; only four round trips a day. Compare that to the present capacity- in shuttle mode, Kahloke can do 4.5 round trips every three hours, for a total of 121 cars. A disastrous decrease. I also recall how tight the five lanes on Quinitsa were, often making it impossible to get out of your car on at least one side, and causing numerous mirror swipes. The sparse turnout, albeit on an evening with pounding rain and a howling gale, probably indicated that most folks here didn't think the idea was viable. Better to work on improving, or at least maintain the service we already have.
|
|
|
Post by compdude787 on Feb 27, 2013 14:58:32 GMT -8
I posted this comment already, but it seems to have gotten ignored. My points are worth consideration: I think that most of your comments had already been discussed in the previous 3 years, in this here thread. That's what I thought when I saw your recent comments. - it's good, because your initial reaction on this strange venture is the same as what the rest of us (and concerned ferry users on those islands) have been saying. ....this shows that there really are significant issues with this concept. If it was obvious to us and to you, why isn't it obvious to BC Ferries? (rhetorical question). I know, sometimes I wonder why BC Ferries is wasting their resources on something like this. I really wish BCF would place more priority in replacing the two rust buckets that serve Powell River, the NIP and the Queen of Burnaby. Pretty much all of the vessels with less than 100-vehicle capacity need to be replaced in the next 10-20 years, and it's really stupid that they are wasting their energy on this cable ferry, which is clearly a flawed concept. Watch it just be like a mini-fastcat... :/
|
|
|
Post by compdude787 on Feb 27, 2013 18:21:00 GMT -8
The idea was born out of several factors. One was frustration over BC Ferries' unwillingness to truly consult islanders on their wishes regarding the cable ferry. Another was continuing resentment over Hornbyites being secondary when it comes to the Buckley Bay to Denman route. It was brought up- and is quite true- that the way the routes are set up now, Denmanites in effect 'cut in' the lineup in front of Hornby users. If a Hornbyite is wanting to catch the 2:40 ferry from Denman West to Buckley Bay, they will need to be in line for the 2:00 ferry from Shingle Spit by about 1:50, assuming there is no overload. From that time, it should be considered that they are a BC Ferries passenger, since the drive across Denman is part of the voyage, given how the routes are structured. A Denmanite wanting to catch the same ferry, however, can leave home well after 1:50 and be in the lineup ahead of the Hornby person who was in the system sooner. There's really no way around this, and it certainly is a factor in busy periods. Route 21 is supposed to serve both islands equally, but it doesn't work that way in practise. Really? That's the strangest policy I've ever heard of! They should get rid of it, since I wouldn't be surprised if that, along with high fares, made people move off of Hornby Island. Quinitsa also used to have five car lanes, which were re-painted to four, cutting its capacity. So are you saying Quinitsa used to carry 70 cars just like her sister Quinsam?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 27, 2013 18:30:53 GMT -8
I think that most of your comments had already been discussed in the previous 3 years, in this here thread. That's what I thought when I saw your recent comments. - it's good, because your initial reaction on this strange venture is the same as what the rest of us (and concerned ferry users on those islands) have been saying. ....this shows that there really are significant issues with this concept. If it was obvious to us and to you, why isn't it obvious to BC Ferries? (rhetorical question). I know, sometimes I wonder why BC Ferries is wasting their resources on something like this. I really wish BCF would place more priority in replacing the two rust buckets that serve Powell River, the NIP and the Queen of Burnaby. Pretty much all of the vessels with less than 100-vehicle capacity need to be replaced in the next 10-20 years, and it's really stupid that they are wasting their energy on this cable ferry, which is clearly a flawed concept. Watch it just be like a mini-fastcat... :/ I totally agree with the cable ferry project because it has be proven to be a success technology, saves fuel, equals a save in money another one is Hornby gets the Quinista. The only thing that I disagree with is the car capacity will be the same as Quinista. I think the car capacity should be 70 cars.
|
|
SolDuc
Voyager
West Coast Cyclist
SolDuc and SOBC - Photo by Scott
Posts: 2,055
|
Post by SolDuc on Feb 27, 2013 18:40:36 GMT -8
R.I.P. Dung Bomb. Gone, and not missed. This isn't a cable ferry post, but since this thread concerns Denman and Hornby, and since this story was a result of the cable controversy, I thought I'd put this here. Sunday night I went to a sparsely attended meeting at the Hornby community hall, to discuss a proposal for a direct Buckley Bay to Shingle Spit ferry route, The proposal came from retired BC Ferries captain Richard Stead. Stead had fourteen years with the Highways ferries and fourteen with BC Ferries, from deckhand to Captain, as well as being VP of the BCFMWU. He is a forty year Hornby resident, and is familiar with all the Denman and Hornby boats since that time. The idea was born out of several factors. One was frustration over BC Ferries' unwillingness to truly consult islanders on their wishes regarding the cable ferry. Another was continuing resentment over Hornbyites being secondary when it comes to the Buckley Bay to Denman route. It was brought up- and is quite true- that the way the routes are set up now, Denmanites in effect 'cut in' the lineup in front of Hornby users. If a Hornbyite is wanting to catch the 2:40 ferry from Denman West to Buckley Bay, they will need to be in line for the 2:00 ferry from Shingle Spit by about 1:50, assuming there is no overload. From that time, it should be considered that they are a BC Ferries passenger, since the drive across Denman is part of the voyage, given how the routes are structured. A Denmanite wanting to catch the same ferry, however, can leave home well after 1:50 and be in the lineup ahead of the Hornby person who was in the system sooner. There's really no way around this, and it certainly is a factor in busy periods. Route 21 is supposed to serve both islands equally, but it doesn't work that way in practise. Another factor prompting the proposal was the difficulty in making further connections to the mainland or to appointments on Vancouver island, particularly in busy season. It was brought out that BC Ferries at one time owned land at Deep Bay, and had planned to operate a ferry from there, stopping at a terminal near the southern end of Denman, and continuing on to Hornby. Whether the Hornby terminal would be at Shingle Spit or perhaps Ford Cove, with a rebuilt road to the Spit, I don't know. BC Ferries sold their Deep Bay property sometime in the '80s. It was also noted that the Quinitsa now is run slower than in the past to save fuel, meaning that in shuttling mode, a round trip takes about 45 minutes, where in the past it might have been 35. Quinitsa also used to have five car lanes, which were re-painted to four, cutting its capacity. Stead proposed to petition BC Ferries to operate a trial route in the off season. If it were after the cable ferry started operation, he suggested using the Quinitsa, supplemented by the Kahloke. Sailing time would be approximately 75 minutes, and he thought the fares would be comparable to current ones. He seemed to think that other boats might be available in future, but clearly, that is not the case. At the end of the meeting, I declined to sign the petition, as did ferries FAC rep Tony Law. The proposal just didn't seem to work. For one thing, BC Ferries would never agree to putting two ferries on a route serving one thousand residents... and you can hardly blame them. The idea of the cable ferry is to save on operating costs, and this revised route 22 would see its costs more than double for labour alone, and would increase considerably for fuel. There could only be one boat on this route, and it would be the Quinitsa. Even with five car lanes, the capacity would be 60 cars leaving Hornby every three hours; only four round trips a day. Compare that to the present capacity- in shuttle mode, Kahloke can do 4.5 round trips every three hours, for a total of 121 cars. A disastrous decrease. I also recall how tight the five lanes on Quinitsa were, often making it impossible to get out of your car on at least one side, and causing numerous mirror swipes. The sparse turnout, albeit on an evening with pounding rain and a howling gale, probably indicated that most folks here didn't think the idea was viable. Better to work on improving, or at least maintain the service we already have. The most logical solution for the extra service would probably be to keep the existing berths at both Buckley Bay and Denman and run an extra vessel if needed by high traffic or maintenance of the Cable Ferry. Are keeping the existing berths in running order part of the current project?
|
|
|
Post by Mike on Feb 27, 2013 18:43:05 GMT -8
I believe the plan was to remove the regular ferry berths after 1-2 years.
|
|
|
Post by Mike C on Feb 27, 2013 18:56:57 GMT -8
Just a couple minor notes... Really? That's the strangest policy I've ever heard of! They should get rid of it, since I wouldn't be surprised if that, along with high fares, made people move off of Hornby Island. It is not policy. The way the system works is a first come-first serve basis, and this is just a side-effect of that. I anticipate that this is an issue on Quadra as well. I would expect the only way around this would be to create a reservation system for Hornby Islanders, which would involve in a major terminal reconfiguration at Denman West. So are you saying Quinitsa used to carry 70 cars just like her sister Quinsam? Just to nitpick - they are not sisters - they are more or less cousins, built five years apart. Neil mentioned in his post that the five-lane configuration creates a 60 AEQ.
|
|
|
Post by compdude787 on Feb 27, 2013 22:01:03 GMT -8
Just a couple minor notes... Really? That's the strangest policy I've ever heard of! They should get rid of it, since I wouldn't be surprised if that, along with high fares, made people move off of Hornby Island. It is not policy. The way the system works is a first come-first serve basis, and this is just a side-effect of that. I anticipate that this is an issue on Quadra as well. [...] First-come, first-served? Not really, from how I read Neil's post that I was quoting, it definitely did not seem that way. It seemed like a "we like Denman Islanders more than Hornby Islanders, so all Denmanites can come to the front of the line" system, which makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. So are you saying Quinitsa used to carry 70 cars just like her sister Quinsam? Just to nitpick - they are not sisters - they are more or less cousins, built five years apart. Neil mentioned in his post that the five-lane configuration creates a 60 AEQ. Grrrr... Why does BC ferries have to have such a complicated fleet?!?! This is why they need more vessel standardization especially with their minor vessels! WSF's fleet, in spite of the fact it has just 22 ferries, is remarkably simple: only 7 classes of ferries (if you separate the Issaquahs into the Issy 100 and 130 subclasses) plus the useless Hiyu which is in its own class. OTOH, BCFerries has 35 ferries and, let's see...BC ferries has 11 ferry classes (with some significant differences within the classes), and 7 unclassed vessels of totally uni que designs to make things even more complicated. Adding to my confusion, I had looked at Wikipedia to find more info about BCF. Big mistake, because it's completely wrong on the classes and which ferries are sisters. Anyhow I really got to correct Wikipedia!
|
|
SolDuc
Voyager
West Coast Cyclist
SolDuc and SOBC - Photo by Scott
Posts: 2,055
|
Post by SolDuc on Feb 27, 2013 22:14:56 GMT -8
Adding to my confusion, I had looked at Wikipedia to find more info about BCF. Big mistake, because it's completely wrong on the classes and which ferries are sisters. Anyhow I really got to correct Wikipedia! Never use wikipedia for ferry research. Ever. The WCFF rule says: -If looking for basic BCFs info, go on westcoastferries.ca -If looking for basic WSF/Black Ball/CP info, go on evergreenfleet.com -If looking for basic AMHS info, go on their official website or do your own research -If looking for basic Europeean ferries info, go on ferryfantastic.webs.com -If looking for more elaborated info, check the forum. Only ask a question once you have read through the whole thread.
|
|
|
Post by compdude787 on Feb 27, 2013 22:23:23 GMT -8
Adding to my confusion, I had looked at Wikipedia to find more info about BCF. Big mistake, because it's completely wrong on the classes and which ferries are sisters. Anyhow I really got to correct Wikipedia! Never use wikipedia for ferry research. Ever. Yes, now I know. On a further note, from looking at the westcoastferries website, the 2 ferries that start with the letter Q don't have the same dimensions. My confusion also stems from the fact that they look similar.
|
|
SolDuc
Voyager
West Coast Cyclist
SolDuc and SOBC - Photo by Scott
Posts: 2,055
|
Post by SolDuc on Feb 27, 2013 22:28:05 GMT -8
Never use wikipedia for ferry research. Ever. Yes, now I know. On a further note, from looking at the westcoastferries website, the 2 ferries that start with the letter Q don't have the same dimensions. My confusion also stems from the fact that they look similar. Yes. They're cousins just like the E-States are cousins of the Issaquah 100s. And yes, BCFs does have a complicated fleet. The K-class is one of the things that really confused me when I began BCFs fleet exploration. Or I must say it still really confuses me.
|
|
|
Post by Mike C on Feb 27, 2013 22:29:58 GMT -8
Just a couple minor notes... It is not policy. The way the system works is a first come-first serve basis, and this is just a side-effect of that. I anticipate that this is an issue on Quadra as well. [...] First-come, first-served? Not really, from how I read Neil's post that I was quoting, it definitely did not seem that way. It seemed like a "we like Denman Islanders more than Hornby Islanders, so all Denmanites can come to the front of the line" system, which makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. You're right, it doesn't make sense, which is why it doesn't exist. Denman West terminal is as such that people line up along the road, similar to a lot of WSF terminals, in a single file with no given priority. As I mentioned, Neil described a situation where, because of the first-come-first-serve basis, Denman islanders are able to get in line before the load from Hornby arrives and gets in line, therefore giving them the advantage. There are no priority or reservation systems in place on any Gulf Island, except for those served by Route 9.
|
|
SolDuc
Voyager
West Coast Cyclist
SolDuc and SOBC - Photo by Scott
Posts: 2,055
|
Post by SolDuc on Feb 27, 2013 22:41:51 GMT -8
There are no priority or reservation systems in place on any Gulf Island, except for those served by Route 9. Well I'll jump in and say that until extremely recently WSF had no reservations for any of their routes. Say the Hardware Store on Vashon (a restaurant nowadays) was lacking salad and the delivery truck was stuck at Fauntleroy because it was commuter hour. I'd have to wait like the others. In the San Juans where space is appointed to each Island it can be difficult. Say a FH-Lopez-Ana sailing is loading. There is a multiple sailing wait at FH, and only 100 cars get on the boat, leaving the 40 or so left for Lopez traffic. The boats stops at Lopez, where there is only 20 cars waiting. Well the boat will not sail full to Anacortes. San Juan Islanders can protest, but the Lopez space will always be the same on that sailing, even if FH is on an overload. And personally I think that if you live on Hornby you made the choice of doing it so you must have tolerance towards related issues such as ferry lineups. Thats my opinion. And I thought that I first it was Denman Islanders that were complaining that with equal capacity on both runs, then a full load of Hornby islanders would travel to the other side of the Island and steal all of the ferry spots.
|
|
|
Post by compdude787 on Feb 28, 2013 10:23:14 GMT -8
First-come, first-served? Not really, from how I read Neil's post that I was quoting, it definitely did not seem that way. It seemed like a "we like Denman Islanders more than Hornby Islanders, so all Denmanites can come to the front of the line" system, which makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. You're right, it doesn't make sense, which is why it doesn't exist. Denman West terminal is as such that people line up along the road, similar to a lot of WSF terminals, in a single file with no given priority. As I mentioned, Neil described a situation where, because of the first-come-first-serve basis, Denman islanders are able to get in line before the load from Hornby arrives and gets in line, therefore giving them the advantage. There are no priority or reservation systems in place on any Gulf Island, except for those served by Route 9. Sorry, I misunderstood Neil's post. I thought he was referring to how things work at Buckley Bay for some reason.
|
|
|
Post by Nickfro on Feb 28, 2013 11:04:45 GMT -8
I can understand the frustration that some Hornby residents experience with Denman residents filling up the line at Denman West before the Hornby traffic shows up. While I haven't spent much time on either island, I'm inclined to say that Hornby residents should know what they've signed up for before moving to Hornby, which is having to take two ferries to get to Vancouver Island on a first come, first served basis that has been in place for a long time. It's simply part of living there, and allocating more travel time than Denman residents is an obvious reality.
If change were to happen to allocate a certain number of Hornby cars on the Buckley run, then (as Mileage Photo has mentioned) upgrades to Denman West terminal to have a 'Hornby' lane would be required.
Given that meetings like this are happening, and that situations like this are occurring in the off season where overloads on the Quinitsa exist, it makes absolutely no sense why the new cable ferry will only accommodate 50 cars and not anticipate increased capacity requirements in the future. Talk about a waste of money. . .
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,177
|
Post by Neil on Feb 28, 2013 11:32:29 GMT -8
I can understand the frustration that some Hornby residents experience with Denman residents filling up the line at Denman West before the Hornby traffic shows up. While I haven't spent much time on either island, I'm inclined to say that Hornby residents should know what they've signed up for before moving to Hornby, which is having to take two ferries to get to Vancouver Island on a first come, first served basis that has been in place for a long time. It's simply part of living there, and allocating more travel time than Denman residents is an obvious reality. If change were to happen to allocate a certain number of Hornby cars on the Buckley run, then (as Mileage Photo has mentioned) upgrades to Denman West terminal to have a 'Hornby' lane would be required. Given that meetings like this are happening, and that situations like this are occurring in the off season where overloads on the Quinitsa exist, it makes absolutely no sense why the new cable ferry will only accommodate 50 cars and not anticipate increased capacity requirements in the future. Talk about a waste of money. . . Nick, as I said in my post, there isn't really any way around the first come first served reality, at least not without considerable complications. The fact that this meeting wasn't better attended probably indicates most islanders appreciate the reality of living here. The fact that more than half of the extra sailings in the entire system happen on routes 21&22 should tell BC Ferries of the folly of replacing Quinitsa with a vessel the same size... but they don't seem to be paying attention.
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,177
|
Post by Neil on Feb 28, 2013 17:22:46 GMT -8
Nick, as I said in my post, there isn't really any way around the first come first served reality, at least not without considerable complications. The fact that this meeting wasn't better attended probably indicates most islanders appreciate the reality of living here. The fact that more than half of the extra sailings in the entire system happen on routes 21&22 should tell BC Ferries of the folly of replacing Quinitsa with a vessel the same size... but they don't seem to be paying attention. That would even happen if BC Ferries replaces the Queen of Nanaimo and the Queen of Burnaby with smaller or the same size of ferries the overloads and extra sailings. How do the Queen of Nanaimo and Queen of Burnaby figure in this conversation?
|
|