|
Post by Balfour on Nov 9, 2009 11:02:29 GMT -8
Definitely a Spaulding inspired design
|
|
|
Post by Barnacle on Nov 14, 2009 10:43:55 GMT -8
I cannot recall if the Elliott Bay Design Group has Nickum & Spaulding in its heritage, but EBDG seems to use the Spaulding pilothouse design a lot--which, IMHO, is pretty much the last word in pilothouses...
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on Nov 14, 2009 22:06:50 GMT -8
I cannot recall if the Elliott Bay Design Group has Nickum & Spaulding in its heritage, but EBDG seems to use the Spaulding pilothouse design a lot--which, IMHO, is pretty much the last word in pilothouses... Apparently the EBDG can trace heritage to N&S as per the following: source: www.flickr.com/groups/spaulding_boats/discuss/72157613136765528/These Alaska Class designs look very much Spaulding inspired and to my eye look very nice. I much prefer the look of these ships over BCFS new builds, but maybe I have a bias!
|
|
|
Post by Barnacle on Nov 15, 2009 8:24:15 GMT -8
Thanks. That makes sense and lines up with a few wisps of memory on the subject, and also explains why the styles are so recognizeable.
|
|
|
Post by dlagrand on Dec 30, 2009 19:13:43 GMT -8
Adding to it is a portable handi-talk sized scanner tuned to maritime frequencies with earplugs.
Then if the conditions are right, a flat on the back stretch out on a lifejacket locker on one of the open decks midships to soak up the scenery and low rumble of the engines.
Life On The Coast.[/quote]
I am dragging my DH along on my June Alaska Ferry trip. He is a ham radio enthusiast, and I think he would get a kick out of a scanner to monitor the maritime freqencies. He will be taking a ham radio along, so will he be able to monitor these frequencies with it or would he need a separate scanner? And where would he look up the frequencies? I really want him to enjoy this trip, as he is quite hesitant (due to a combination of motion sickness and a strong preference to sleeping in a real bed - lol)
thanks!
|
|
M/V LeConte
Chief Steward
~ I believe in Ferries! ~
Posts: 147
|
Post by M/V LeConte on Jan 1, 2010 19:12:33 GMT -8
He will be taking a ham radio along, so will he be able to monitor these frequencies with it or would he need a separate scanner? And where would he look up the frequencies? Here is a link to the USCG site with a list of VHF Channels and their frequencies. www.navcen.uscg.gov/marcomms/vhf.htmGood VHF Channels to listen in on would be 16 (Distress and Hailing), and 13 (Bridge to Bridge Communications). Also about one hour before arrival in Kodiak and Homer you can listen in on the ship "checking in" with the terminal on VHF Channel 11. Also on that page you can find the WX Broadcast Frequencies. I have also read elsewhere about your looking for a brochure. I asked my wife (My in-house expert) about them and she doesn't believe that they have them for the Tusty. The Tusty will be in Juneau in January for a special cross-gulf sailing for the legislature. I plan on swinging by and checking her out (she is the only ship of our fleet I have yet to see. I will be sure to see what I can find, and post the results. Cheers! ~LeC
|
|
|
Post by dlagrand on Jan 2, 2010 9:41:42 GMT -8
thanks! i have emailed the info to my hubby and he will no doubt have it all programmed in long before we leave OK. It will give him something to do on the long trip to Dutch. Please let me know what your visit to the Tusty is like. this forum has really spiked my interest in the whole ferry fleet, and may make future vacation plans centered around ferry trips.
dl
|
|
|
Post by darkfred on Feb 28, 2010 13:27:34 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by SS Shasta on Jun 20, 2010 10:40:26 GMT -8
From what I hear, the latest scheme is to limit the construction of these "tin cans" to Alaska yards. This should then become another golden opportunity for the taxpayers to be ripped off. This eliminates the opportunity for competitive bidding. The yard here in Ketchikan is already heavily subsidized by both the State of Alaska and the local Ketchikan Borough. It has been since its beginning. Will these ripoffs ever end?
|
|
Quatchi
Voyager
Engineering Officer - CCG
Posts: 930
|
Post by Quatchi on Jun 20, 2010 21:48:06 GMT -8
Wow, way to help the locals along there buddy. Lets just eliminate every chance they have at sustaining their economy. Also, it is of benefit for northern communities to be subsidized so that people will actually work and live there to protect the sovereignty of the area.
|
|
|
Post by SS Shasta on Jun 21, 2010 10:29:32 GMT -8
Wow, way to help the locals along there buddy. Lets just eliminate every chance they have at sustaining their economy. Also, it is of benefit for northern communities to be subsidized so that people will actually work and live there to protect the sovereignty of the area. The best way we have to sustain our economy is to keep our taxes low and eliminate these special interest grants at taxpayer's expense. BTW: One major concern is that these proposed "tin cans" will operate with significantly smaller crews and leave many hard working ferry workers on the beach. They will eliminate staterooms for passengers which will be of great discomfort for many of us who enjoy riding/using current AMHS ferries.
|
|
|
Post by alaskanmohican on Jun 21, 2010 14:01:54 GMT -8
New member here, just thought I would come out of lurking to finally post something. Regarding these "tin cans" it is true that there will be no staterooms, although they are planning on some day rooms. It is felt that staterooms are not necesary since the vessels will be day boats. Currently the Malaspina is serving as a dayboat in North Lynn Canal and although she has staterooms, they are not being used except for a few. Putting an Alaska Class on this run would be more cost efffective that using a large mainliner as a dayboat.
|
|
Quatchi
Voyager
Engineering Officer - CCG
Posts: 930
|
Post by Quatchi on Jun 21, 2010 15:49:25 GMT -8
Aren't these going to be additional vessels? As I understood it new crew would be required to serve on these ships. This would leave all the other boat crew untouched. That was my understanding at least.
Are the shipyards in Alaska busy or are they at risk of closing. In BC our shipbuilding is pretty much toast. I think it would be wise to keep the industry going in Alaska.
I don't know much about the Alaskan financial situation and national policies, but in Canada the federal government subsidizes all kinda of programs and projects both to help draw people up there and create jobs in the territories. We have to do as much as possible to protect our land and keep the Russians out.
Cheers,
|
|
|
Post by alaskanmohican on Jun 21, 2010 18:22:29 GMT -8
The deal with the Alaska Class is that AMHS wants to build many of these. The first is not really expected until around 2014 or 2015. Once the first comes online, it will depend on the condition of the fleet, but you will probably not see any large vessels retired. Once they are able to get more than one built, then you will probably start to see some vessel retirements. Over the next ten years you will probably see some of the older mainliners retired, but there will still be some of the larger overnight vessels in service. With the current fleet deployment, we are not using all our mainliners as mainliners. As I mentioned above, the Malaspina is being used as a dayboat. By building a dayboat, this will free up the Mal for other runs in the system. As far as having Alaska shipyards build the new vessels, personally I think this would be a good idea as long as the yards can deliver a good product. Currently AMHS has a good working relationship with ASD in Ketchikan and I would like to see that yard get the contract. This has the potential to provide years of work for Alaskans. As far as the yard being subsidized, AMHS is subsidized by the state as well. In fact revenue from ticket sales makes up roughly half of what it costs to operarte the system, so AMHS needs the subsidies to continue operations.
|
|
|
Post by alaskanmohican on Jul 8, 2010 17:57:37 GMT -8
Another article or actually a letter that the Alaska Class web page has put a link to. The letter: www.juneauempire.com/stories/070410/let_665174306.shtmlThe Alaska Class documents page: www.dot.state.ak.us/amhs/alaska_class/docs.shtmlWhat interests me is not so much the letter, but the comments posted below it. Like many comments on news stories, some are good, some are very misinformed opinions. But one theme predominant in the comments is about the road out of Juneau. This is of course a subject that has Juneau divided. I bring this up because I think this is the reason why there have not been many straight forward answers as to where an Alaska Class will serve. Basically, from what I have heard and read is that the Alaska Class is meant to serve two masters in a way. The Southeast Alaska Transportation Plan is a document that is suppose to guide AMHS in its future plans for vessels and fleet deployment. This large document calls for a road out of Juneau to be built. This road project is called the Juneau Access. The plan calls for a road at least as far as the Katzehin River, accross the Lynn Canal from Haines. From there a new ferry terminal would be built and ferries would link Haines and Skagway to this terminal. This plan was approved, however it has been stalled by the courts. So now you have the Marine Highway which is suppose to follow a plan that is going nowhere at the moment. So basically, AMHS is building the Alaska Class as a boat that could possibly serve this short link between Haines, Skagway, and the Katzehin if the road were built that far. That is one "master." The other is that since there is no road at the moment, and it is hard to say when or even if it will be built, the Alaska Class can serve as the dayboat between Juneau, Haines, and Skagway. So what I mean by two masters is that with this boat the Marine Highway can say that they are constructing a boat that can serve the route proposed by the Juneau Access Project and the Southeast Alaska Transportation Plan, while also building the boat to be able to serve in a capacity that is more likely to happen at the moment. As far as my humble opinion, I think an Alaska Class will be good for AMHS, however, personally I am not so sure of the plan to build "many" of these. I think we need at least one, but if the Marine Highway is to work towards replacing our aging and yet beloved fleet, they need to look at actual replacements. What I mean is that we should build an actual mainliner, staterooms and all, to replace mainliners. Maybe we don't need all the mainliners we currently have, if we stick to our current fleet deployment. But deployments change every few years. So, personally, I think building an Alaska Class is a good idea, but I think the Marine Highway should start to look at actual overnight vessels as the next new build after the first Alaska Class is built.
|
|
|
Post by alaskanmohican on Dec 18, 2010 14:38:36 GMT -8
AMHS has updated their Alaska Class Ferry website, amongst other things they put a link to an article from the Kethcikan Daily News. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- EDITORIAL NO PLACE LIKE HOME The Alaska Class Ferry Vessel project no longer belongs to the feds. The Federal Highway Administration started design of the new vessels to replace the original 1960s Alaska Marine Highway System ferries. The feds spent $1.7 million on design. The state will reimburse the feds and take over the project. Ketchikan's economic future is largely dependent on building the vessels at its shipyard. Building four vessels at about $120 million apiece translates into about eight years of manufacturing jobs for the First City. It also is about $480 million spent in Alaska instead of elsewhere. Gov. Sean Parnell says Alaska will have a competitive bid process, but under state rules it will give Alaska shipyards bidder preference. Seward also has a shipyard. Outside shipyards also likely will be interested in the contracts. It's expected that whichever shipyard wins the first contract will end up building all of the vessels. By the time one is completed, that shipyard has the edge in that it has done the work once and can do it more efficiently and with greater expertise the second, third and fourth time. Competition for the first contract will be significant. The feds completed 70-80 percent of the ferries' design. Then, FHWA determined all the requirements hadn't been met for the project to continue under federal authority. The feds dropped the project and await reimbursement. Gov. Parnell says he hasn't built his budget for the upcoming legislative session. Of course, neither has the Legislature. But the money to repay the federal government likely would be included in the state's next budget, freeing Alaska to build its own ferries. Parnell, who recognizes the import of providing jobs in Alaska, clearly would like to see an Alaska shipyard get the contract to build the ferries. That's to be expected of an Alaska governor. A governor in any other ship-building state would favor local bidder preference and in-state shipyards, too. As has been pointed out in this column before, Washington's code requires its ferries be "constructed within the boundaries of the state of Washington." While the Legislature is examining its budget and what it will pay in regard to building the Alaska Class Ferry Vessels, it should consider a similar law to Washington's. Alaska ferries should be built in Alaska. It is wise for the state to take over the projects. If the state funds the projects, then it can give bidder preference to the Alaska shipyards — at least one of which has the capacity to build the Alaska Class Ferry Vessels. (Under federal rules, bidder preference wouldn't be allowed.) Alaska bidder preference also increases the chances that the millions spent will be in Alaska, creating Alaska jobs and building up Alaska's economy. Alaska, and Ketchikan, too, should be as self-reliant as is possible. Here is an opportunity. Alaska, and Ketchikan through its shipyard, must take advantage of it. It will greatly affect the economic viability of both. For Ketchikan, the shipyard is an integral part of the business community that provides yearround employment in a community largely dependent on seasonal industry. We welcome the Alaska Class Ferry Vessel project back home — where it belongs. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- link: www.dot.state.ak.us/amhs/alaska_class/documents/kdn_111210.pdf
|
|
|
Post by alaskanmohican on Dec 21, 2010 19:04:25 GMT -8
A few more articles on the Alaska Class Website. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- New ferry unfunded in Parnell's budget Alaska Dispatch The fiscal year 2012 budget released this week by Alaska Gov. Sean Parnell funds lots of infrastructure projects in the 49th state, but a new state ferry, sought to improve service for Southeast residents, failed to make the cut. The $11.5 billion budget proposal funds everything from highways to public schools - and includes some $400 million in tax cuts to oil companies. Southeast regional leaders had hoped for a $60 million slice toward "the first Alaska Class Ferry," and Sen. Bart Stedman, R-Sitka, said it's an "opportunity that we don't want to miss, from a state perspective, on building our infrastructure," according to a report by KFSK public radio in Petersburg, Alaska. Stedman, co-chair of the Senate Finance Committee, wants Parnell and the state to contribute to building the $120 million ship. Parnell wanted federal dollars to pay for it but the ferry does not qualify for funding without further environmental impact review. Stedman thinks there's a way to finagle federal funds in order to work the ferry into the state's general fund. Meantime, the citizens' advisory panel that oversees Alaska's ferry system met Tuesday in Ketchikan and voted in support of quick action on the Alaska Class Ferry, according to KCAW public radio. Link: www.alaskadispatch.com/dispatches/alaska-beat/88-alaska-beat/7857-state-ferry-unfunded-in-parnells-budget----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- MTAB wants new ferry built in Alaska Ed Schoenfeld JUNEAU, ALASKA (2010-12-15) The citizens’ panel overseeing the state ferry system wants quick action to build a new ship. The Marine Transportation Advisory Board voted Tuesday in support of constructing the first Alaska Class Ferry during a meeting in Ketchikan. Chairman Mike Korsmo says the Legislature and administration should fully fund the approximately $120 million vessel. "We obviously want them to keep moving with the process and we don’t want to get stopped anymore," he says. Ferry officials thought they had the money needed to build the ship: half from the state and half from the feds. They planned to put it out to bid last summer. But federal officials required additional environmental reviews, a process the state declined to follow. Federal rules also prohibit an in-state preference backers hope to use to steer construction to Ketchikan’s Alaska Ship and Drydock. MTAB board member Robert Venables of Haines crafted the board resolution supporting ferry funding, as well as finding an in-state contractor. "To take the argument one step closer to home here in Ketchikan, it’s not just handing Alaska Ship and Drydock a project. What it’s doing is helping cue up the beginning of a manufacturing base and an industry that has already begun," he says. Advisory board members toured the Ketchikan shipyard and met with its managers before their meeting. Their vote endorsed the Construction Manager-General Contractor process the shipyard prefers. That allows the state to hire a shipyard to work on the ferry’s final design, then have the same yard build the vessel. State officials hope to build three Alaska Class Ferries. They’re designed for shorter runs and won‘t include passenger cabins. The first ship is slated for the Lynn Canal route, connecting Skagway, Haines and Juneau. Another ship could sail between Ketchikan and Prince Rupert, and a third vessel could serve Prince William Sound. Link: kcaw.org/modules/local_news/index.php?op=sideBlock&syndicated=true&ID=1558----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Something I noticed between these 2 articles and the one I posted previously is that one article reports that Governor Parnell wants to fund the Alaska Class with state funds to have more control over giving the construction contract to an Alaska yard, namely ASD in Ketchikan. Then in the first article above it mentions that Parnell wanted federal dollars to help pay for the new ships. A little contradictory, it may just be those writing the articles got some facts confused. The article contained in my previous post does mention four Alaska Class ships, when everything else I've read and heard is that AMHS wants three Alaska Class. There is talk of wanting to construct a direct replacement for a vessel currently in service, but first the Marine Highway wants to get at least one Alaska Class built, this may be where the one article got four ships from. Anyway, interesting articles and will be interesting to see what happens next. The Alaska Class is a little behind the schedule AMHS was hoping for. There are more documents from the design process posted at the Alaska Class website, Link: www.dot.state.ak.us/amhs/alaska_class/index.shtml
|
|
|
Post by alaskanmohican on Dec 22, 2010 19:01:33 GMT -8
One more article from the Alaska Class website that gives a little more explanation to the current status of this future build. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- JUNEAU, ALASKA (2010-12-16) Governor Sean Parnell’s capital budget for the next fiscal year does not include funding for a new state ferry. But that money, or at least some of it, could still be appropriated. The budget -- covering schools, highways, roads and other public-works projects -- was released Wednesday in Anchorage. The $1.5-billion spending plan includes about $86 million for Southeast. Many regional leaders hoped to see up to $60 million toward the first Alaska Class Ferry. Budget Director Karen Rehfeld says funds may be added. "We’re going to need to come back through the budget and look at that, particularly in the supplemental bill, to figure out what we’re going to do to get the general funds necessary to continue with the project," she says. "Clearly that's an opportunity that we don’t want to miss, from a state’s perspective, on building our infrastructure, says Sitka Republican Bert Stedman, who assembles the legislature’s capital budget as co-chairman of the Senate Finance Committee. He pushed last year for the $60 million in state funds needed to build the first Alaska Class Ferry. But Parnell instead dedicated that amount in federal dollars, and the state later learned the project wasn’t eligible for the money. Stedman says there’s a way to get funds back in, to complete the approximately $120 million ship. "We’ve been working with the Department of Transportation to do some federal fund shifting, take some federal money that was supposed to go to the marine highway and send it up north for roads. And then we’d take general funds for the marine highway. So I’ll have to sit down and have some discussions with the governor on that," he says. House Speaker and Nikiski Republican Mike Chenault says he’s willing to consider the project. "We know the ferry system is just like the highway system here in the Railbelt where I live and it’s important that we’re able to get commerce up and down the road," he says. But it’s a large sum for a legislature that has to meet statewide needs. "$60 million is a lot of money in your pocketbook and mine. And I think if we’re going to go forward with it we just need to make sure it’s a good investment and that the people in Southeast are going to see a benefit from that," he says. Parnell’s capital budget includes about $30 million in state and federal funds for other ferry projects. They include vessel overhauls and work on the system’s headquarters in Ketchikan’s Ward Cove. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Link: kcaw.org/modules/local_news/index.php?op=sideBlock&syndicated=true&ID=1560The article goes on about other items in the budget, but I just included the part about the Alaska Class. Personally I do want to see at least one Alaska Class built. Currently the Fairweather is not being the most dependable with four weather cancelations within the last week, and the Chenega with two cancellations. The Fast Ferries are very popular in the summer on their respective runs, but come winter weather, and the Fairweather seems to live up to her name. If we even get one Alaska Class this vessel would be able to continue operating into the winter so ideally there would not be same need for the FVF's to provide some coverage.
|
|
|
Post by Name Omitted on Apr 29, 2011 9:28:41 GMT -8
krbd.org/modules/local_news/index.php?op=sideBlock&syndicated=true&ID=1753A couple of weeks old, especially since our legislature is still in special session, but discussion of State money for the improvement of the yards in Ketchikan, along with an Alaska style re-allocation of funds in order to get money from the Federal Government without the normal strings attached, so we can give preference to local build bids for the Alaska Class ferry. I'm still a little surprised at the expected $120 million to build, which is $40 million more than the larger, ocean going Kennicott 13 years ago.
|
|
|
Post by EGfleet on Jun 14, 2011 4:18:42 GMT -8
Future of Alaska Class Ferries In Doubt by CoastAlaska JUNEAU, ALASKA (2011-06-13) Ferry supporters are lobbying Governor Sean Parnell to keep money for a new vessel in the budget. But even if it survives his veto pen, it may not be enough. here's an update on funding for the Alaska Class Ferry.
The Legislature put $60 million for a new ferry in the operating budget before adjourning this spring.
But Governor Sean Parnell has said lawmakers spent too much this year. And some worry the ferry money might take a hit.
"The Juneau delegation and other legislators from Southeast Alaska are really pushing to keep that $60 million in there," says Senator Dennis Egan, a capital city Democrat and backer of the Alaska Class Ferry project. (Read more about the project.)
He says that money, plus another $60 million already set aside, should get the state ready for construction.
Officials originally planned to use $60 million in federal funds. But they decided not to use it because of regulatory requirements. One would have blocked an Alaska preference for contractors.
"It would be all state funding so we wouldn’t have to worry about following federal guidelines on certain issues. And it would allow the Alaska Ship and Drydock in Ketchikan to bid on it and have Alaska jobs."
The shipyard hoped to negotiate an exclusive contract, but Parnell said ferry construction would go out to bid. The 350-foot, 500-passenger, 60-vehicle vessel would sail northern Southeast waters. (Hear an earlier report.)
The governor’s office is not ready to say “yes” or “no” on ferry funding.
Budget Director Karen Rehfeld says the item, like hundreds of others, will be reviewed as part of the veto-and-approval process. But she says the administration knows about the need.
Transportation Commissioner Marc Luiken says he’s made his views known. But he won’t second-guess Parnell, who is his boss.
"From a department perspective we definitely support the Alaska Class Ferry and will continue to support the governor as to when and how to fund it."
The $60 million in the operating budget would go into the state’s vessel replacement fund. Another legislative appropriation would be needed to dedicate it to the Alaska Class Ferry.
Transportation officials have been working on the project for several years. They have a preliminary design. And, if there’s no veto, there will be $120 million available.
"That estimate is a couple of years old. So whether we can actually get a ship built from that amount of money, I think, remains to be seen," says Captain Mike Neussl, who runs the ferry system.
He hopes the money makes it through the veto process, and it’s enough to build a ship. But he says that will be hard to know until bids come in.
"The commissioner and I and the Department of Transportation are working with the administration, the governor’s chief of staff, the deputy chief of staff and up through the governor, to determine the best procurement process that ensures fairness and competition and a level playing field. That process is still not finalized and is the subject of ongoing negotiations and discussions."
Plans came out of a process involving ferry staff and public input. Officials decided on a new “class” of ship that would sail routes taking less than a day.
"The basic design of a 350-foot, steel-hulled, diesel-powered vessel with no staterooms for passengers but staterooms for the crew seems to be the general conceptual design. Specifics and actual details of that remain to be developed during detailed design."
The first ship would sail Lynn Canal, including Juneau, Haines and Skagway. If more money comes through, a second ship could connect Ketchikan and Prince Rupert. And a third vessel could join the first in Lynn Canal, one of the marine highway’s busiest routes, or sail Prince William Sound.
Neussl says contracting, design and construction could take three to five years. New ships would replace older vessels in the fleet.
Juneau state Senator Egan says he optimistic Parnell will fund the project.
"Even though it wasn’t in the administration’s budget, I think they’re cognizant of the fact that it will provide great job opportunities for the people of Southeast Alaska. And I’m just really hoping it will make it through."
The operating budget was sent to the governor last week. Veto decisions are due by the end of the month.
The capital budget also has $6 million for Ketchikan shipyard expansion that would help the facility get ready for ferry construction.
|
|
M/V LeConte
Chief Steward
~ I believe in Ferries! ~
Posts: 147
|
Post by M/V LeConte on Jul 14, 2011 6:34:24 GMT -8
Sounds like things might be moving forward... From the Juneau Empire. juneauempire.com/local/2011-07-12/funds-hand-ferry-officials-look-build-new-vessel With funds in hand, ferry officials look to build new vessel Posted: July 12, 2011 - 8:53pm | Updated: July 12, 2011 - 9:07pm By Pat Forgey Copyright 2011 . JUNEAU EMPIRE Alaska this year took a step towards getting a new state ferry with a $60 million appropriation into the Alaska Marine Highway System’s vessel replacement fund. Combined with the $60 million already there, ferry officials now believe they have the $120 million it will cost to design and build a new Alaska-class ferry. The vessel replacement fund is now assumed to be fully funded, said Mike Neussl, the Department of Transportation and Public Facilities’ deputy commissioner for marine operations. “Of course, none of us really know what an Alaska-class ferry is going to cost,” Neussl told the Marine Transportation Advisory Board on Tuesday. The design process on the new class of vessels has already begun, with at least some of the $120 million already spent, he said. The final cost won’t be known until the contract to build the new ferries goes out to bid and is completed. MTAB Chair Mike Korsmo of Skagway urged AMHS staff to keep the process moving as quickly as possible. “We are really anxious to see this get moving forward,” Korsmo said. The ferry funding had been a top priority for Southeast legislators, who were happy to see Gov. Sean Parnell approve it when he signed the state’s budgets last month. With many of the ships in Alaska’s ferry fleet nearing what is thought to be the end of their useful lives, the state has been seeking to design a new class of vessels that will be fuel-efficient and cheaper to operate than the fleet’s aging mainline vessels. One area of savings is by making the new vessels “day boats,” meaning they won’t have overnight accommodations. That provides a substantial savings in construction and crew needs, ferry officials say. One possible route for the Alaska-class ferries might be in Lynn Canal, between Juneau, Haines and Skagway, ferry officials say. The larger mainline vessels would continue to handle the longer, overnight runs. The Alaska-class ferries would be 350 feet, somewhat smaller than the Columbia’s 418 feet, but would only carry 50 vehicles, compared to 134 for the Columbia. While funding for only a single vessel is now available, ferry officials say they hope to use the same design for future vessels as well, lowering the overall cost. Several of the vessels they’re likely to replace were built in 1963. The next step for building a new ferry is establishment of a procurement process. The state is pondering a system of streamlining construction oversight new to Alaska but used in Utah and a few other places. Neussl told the board he recently briefed Parnell’s staff on what he wanted to do, but hadn’t heard yet whether that will be approved. “We don’t have clear marching orders as to what procurement process we are going to use,” he said. • Contact reporter Pat Forgey at 523-2250 or at patrick.forgey@juneauempire,com. .
|
|
|
Post by NMcKay on Jul 27, 2011 13:24:55 GMT -8
Ha! only 50 cars? is that right? how does that make sense? they are nice boats, but there are 2 "Non-Native" boats sitting in Vancouver that could do that right now, for significantly less than the 120 Million they want (think half-dozen million). why the heck would they do that? i know they were never build for the rugged alaska coast, but somebody has to think "cheap to build"+"Cheap To Operate" not super expensive like these are.
|
|
|
Post by lmtengs on Jul 27, 2011 13:37:21 GMT -8
Ha! only 50 cars? is that right? how does that make sense? they are nice boats, but there are 2 "Non-Native" boats sitting in Vancouver that could do that right now, for significantly less than the 120 Million they want (think half-dozen million). why the heck would they do that? i know they were never build for the rugged alaska coast, but somebody has to think "cheap to build"+"Cheap To Operate" not super expensive like these are. Keep in mind that the Klatawa and Kulleet are not designed for open water crossings. Also, The Jones Act prevents them from being used in Alaska, as they weren't built in-state. Another thing, the Klatawa and Kulleet are getting on in years, and for the price that they're being sold at, I think AMHS would rather purchase a ship that they can get more years out of. The Albion ferries also don't have adequate passenger space for the kinds of routes that the Alaska Class ferries are going to serve. The 'two ships near Vancouver' just aren't the design that AMHS is looking for, in fact, they're as close to the polar opposite as any ferry could be.
|
|
|
Post by alaskanmohican on Jul 27, 2011 15:27:27 GMT -8
Ha! only 50 cars? is that right? how does that make sense? they are nice boats, but there are 2 "Non-Native" boats sitting in Vancouver that could do that right now, for significantly less than the 120 Million they want (think half-dozen million). why the heck would they do that? i know they were never build for the rugged alaska coast, but somebody has to think "cheap to build"+"Cheap To Operate" not super expensive like these are. How does this make sense? Hmm where to begin, well first as The Canadian Viking pointed out, there's the Jones Act, but ignoring that, the Klatawa and Kulleet are, well, nothing like what is needed. All they have going for them is a similar vehicle capacity. Some things to bear in mind: - The Alaska Class, while considered dayboats, are still going to be serving routes lasting anywhere from 4-6 hours one way on average. You need some space and amenities for the passengers during that sailing time. - The new ferries will be traveling on open waters, while not the open ocean they can still run into some rough weather. Also the US Coast Guard regs do not allow people to stay on the car deck while the vessel is underway, the Lituya being the only exception due to the route she serves. It is worth noting that the Lituya is pretty much confined to that one route because of it's open car deck design. - speaking of weather, one complaint travelers have regarding the Fast Ferries are their limitations in stormy weather, the Alaska Class are meant to be able to "weather" some severe weather. -regarding the 50 car capacity, you have to remember that this is Alaska, we simply do not have the population base that the coast of BC and even Washington has. 50 car capacity is adequate for our current and projected needs, Alaska is still somewhat "remote." We are definitely not as remote as we once were, but Alaska and the Yukon are still fairly isolated areas when compared to our near neighbors of BC and Washington. So really, while the Alaska Class may not be the absolute best design for Alaska ever, it does appear to be a good design for its intended purpose.
|
|
|
Post by SS Shasta on Jul 28, 2011 5:42:47 GMT -8
This design as never made good sense to me. When I responded to a DOT request for public impute, I could clearly feel the agency's closed mind to public impute. My main concern was the lack of staterooms which many tired travelers need on this leg of their journey. This lack of staterooms will also limit their use as substitutes for main line vessels. They also have too small a vehicle capacity.
It seems like DOT aims to sharply reduce crew size. Why does it easier to reduce crew size rather than administrative office overhead?
|
|