|
|
Post by Curtis on Sept 23, 2016 10:36:29 GMT -8
A couple years ago I posted the whistle of the Burrard Beaver, now I finally have the Burrard Otter to complete the set.
While I don't have recordings of the Breeze or the Otter II yet, I do have a recording of the BS Con, which has a similar sounding whistle.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dane on Sept 23, 2016 17:13:03 GMT -8
Nicely done. Sometimes it can take a while to capture that!
|
|
|
|
Post by mybidness459 on Nov 5, 2016 11:57:26 GMT -8
Went for ride on the 2 new seabuses this morning took Pacific Breeze to LQ and Otter2 back to Wf. Burrard Beaver at WF and the Otter1 in the maintainance slip. First time I got to see all 4 in one day not. To leave out Coastal Renaissance High and dry in the Drydock.
|
|
Nick
Voyager 
Chief Engineer - Queen of Richmond
Posts: 2,080 
|
Post by Nick on Nov 23, 2016 18:01:45 GMT -8
So the Mayor's Council has apparently approved a $2B transit plan for Metro Vancouver. Included in this plan is SeaBus service every 15 minutes every day, and every 10 minutes during rush periods. Also mentioned is a "new SeaBus", which I had assumed to be one of either one of the originals having been life extended. Then I saw a mention of 10 minute service on delivery of the new SeaBus. So, this begs the question: They already have 2 new vessels. I'm hardly a frequent user, but last I was there the Beaver looked like it had at least had an MLU of sorts. Is it still then scheduled to be retired if they order another new ship? Or kept around as a spare? On another subject, I'd assume that a new vessel would be purchased overseas as was the Otter II? Article here: bc.ctvnews.ca/2b-transit-plan-approved-by-metro-vancouver-mayors-1.3173688 |
|
|
|
Post by Blue Bus Fan on Nov 23, 2016 19:10:45 GMT -8
So the Mayor's Council has apparently approved a $2B transit plan for Metro Vancouver. Included in this plan is SeaBus service every 15 minutes every day, and every 10 minutes during rush periods. Also mentioned is a "new SeaBus", which I had assumed to be one of either one of the originals having been life extended. Then I saw a mention of 10 minute service on delivery of the new SeaBus. So, this begs the question: They already have 2 new vessels. I'm hardly a frequent user, but last I was there the Beaver looked like it had at least had an MLU of sorts. Is it still then scheduled to be retired if they order another new ship? Or kept around as a spare? Article here: bc.ctvnews.ca/2b-transit-plan-approved-by-metro-vancouver-mayors-1.3173688I believe the Burrard Beaver will be kept for a spare. I don't understand the logic on rolling out SeaBus improvements for peak when we already have four vessel. |
|
|
|
Post by Mike C on Nov 24, 2016 11:26:23 GMT -8
So the Mayor's Council has apparently approved a $2B transit plan for Metro Vancouver. Included in this plan is SeaBus service every 15 minutes every day, and every 10 minutes during rush periods. Also mentioned is a "new SeaBus", which I had assumed to be one of either one of the originals having been life extended. Then I saw a mention of 10 minute service on delivery of the new SeaBus. So, this begs the question: They already have 2 new vessels. I'm hardly a frequent user, but last I was there the Beaver looked like it had at least had an MLU of sorts. Is it still then scheduled to be retired if they order another new ship? Or kept around as a spare? On another subject, I'd assume that a new vessel would be purchased overseas as was the Otter II? Article here: bc.ctvnews.ca/2b-transit-plan-approved-by-metro-vancouver-mayors-1.3173688IIRC the Burrard Beaver has always been planned to be kept in the fleet as an extra, with the original Otter being slated for retirement. That hasn't been the case - it was 2009 when we thought we would see the Otter at the scrapyard (with the Pacific Breeze entering service), and it is still out in service today. TransLink seems to have a hard time letting go, unlike their counterparts at BCFS. The Beaver's "MLU" of sorts involved upgrades below decks, and a new paint job - the interior is largely original (and, as I understand it, is the bridge console/components are as well). The 10 minute service delivery has been talked about since the Olympics. It was supposed to happen after the delivery of the Breeze, unfortunately TransLink found themselves without the operating capital to keep that service in operation outside of a few event dates a year, and even that is just the 15 minute service with an extra ship thrown in (similar to Route 2). We await the arrival of the Burrard Crisp Waters (that is, if TransLink resumes naming their ships after Febreeze scents  ). I think you would be correct in assuming that the vessel would be built by a foreign shipyard once again. |
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on Dec 17, 2016 23:09:57 GMT -8
Burrard Otter II, the newest of the SeaBus fleet, departing Vancouver's Waterfront Station on a wintry 17 December 2016. Until the last couple of days I had never ridden on this particular Seabus. For me the passenger experience is good & you can see out of the windows. It is, IMHO, a better vessel than the Breeze.  © WCK-JST by Jim Thorne, on Flickr
|
|
|
|
Post by timmyc on Dec 22, 2016 18:26:12 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on Dec 23, 2016 10:04:40 GMT -8
Burrard Pacific Breeze arrives @ Waterfront Terminal, Vancouver - late afternoon - 17 December 2016.  © WCK-JST by Jim Thorne, on Flickr
|
|
|
|
Post by Blue Bus Fan on Jan 12, 2017 20:13:04 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on Jan 19, 2017 20:56:37 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by Blue Bus Fan on Mar 10, 2017 19:10:33 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on Apr 22, 2017 8:04:02 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by Blue Bus Fan on May 11, 2017 12:29:12 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by Blue Bus Fan on Jun 2, 2017 21:45:41 GMT -8
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,308
|
Post by Neil on Jun 2, 2017 22:13:25 GMT -8
Forty years to reflect on a rather astonishing design flaw... on one of the most magnificent harbours in North America, they designed a boat where you couldn't go outside. This could have been one of the iconic features of a tourist visit to Vancouver. What a lost opportunity. |
|
|
|
Post by Mike C on Jun 3, 2017 7:07:15 GMT -8
Forty years to reflect on a rather astonishing design flaw... on one of the most magnificent harbours in North America, they designed a boat where you couldn't go outside. This could have been one of the iconic features of a tourist visit to Vancouver. What a lost opportunity. The SeaBus is a part of the transit network first - and a tourist attraction second. While the design of the vessel does not allow passengers to wander around on the exterior, it is capable of moving 800 people (400 off/on) plus a turnaround in under 2 minutes - an incredible volume that allows for better frequency and capacity, a feat not seen elsewhere in North America, except for maybe the Staten Island Ferry. The small, compact design also renders it fairly light, good on fuel, and reasonably cheap to operate. Exterior decks would likely hinder both of those things, and require modifications to the terminals as well. |
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on Jun 3, 2017 9:34:59 GMT -8
I get where Neil is coming from on his point regarding the absence of outdoor deck space/ seating on the SeaBuses*, but Mr Coulson is right. Had they opted to design the SeaBus system as a transit and tourist operation they would very likely not have been nearly as efficient as they are at moving people across the harbour. This 1970's initiative started under the government of Dave Barrett produced a superb people moving operation at a relatively low cost.
Vancouver is a city of waterways that fails to take real advantage of those waterways (other than the one SeaBus route) for moving people around. Instead, billions of dollars are spent to build highways, roads & bridges to bring ever more cars into an already terribly congested city.
Happy anniversary to the water buses ...
*The photographer in me notes that outdoor deck space on the SeaBuses would make harbour picture taking opportunities far better than what you can get from the inside.
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,308
|
Post by Neil on Jun 3, 2017 9:53:03 GMT -8
Obviously the system can't be modified now, but I don't believe for a second that if it had been designed with an outside deck in the first place there would have been any impairment of its primary function as a transportation service. Mike C mentioned the Staten Island ferries... a perfect example of a system that carries an enormous number of commuters and tourists, enjoying a spectacular harbor view outside.
WettCoast Jim is right; we've made very poor use of our waterways around Vancouver. I think of all the docks along the Fraser that could be connected by a public transit route, from Steveston to Fort Langley, that would also be a tourist draw.
|
|
|
|
Post by northwesterner on Jun 3, 2017 10:24:02 GMT -8
Obviously the system can't be modified now, but I don't believe for a second that if it had been designed with an outside deck in the first place there would have been any impairment of its primary function as a transportation service. Mike C mentioned the Staten Island ferries... a perfect example of a system that carries an enormous number of commuters and tourists, enjoying a spectacular harbor view outside. WettCoast Jim is right; we've made very poor use of our waterways around Vancouver. I think of all the docks along the Fraser that could be connected by a public transit route, from Steveston to Fort Langley, that would also be a tourist draw. I disagree here too, Neil. The incredible thing about the SeaBus is that it is one of, if not, the most efficient over-water mass transit in the world. With a SkyTrain connection (now) on one end, and the superbly designed Lonsdale Quay bus facility on the other, it was designed to do one thing and one thing alone - move lots of people across the harbor as efficiently as possible. Other lauded passenger ferry systems around the world aren't nearly as efficient (whether its the Star Ferry in Hong Kong or the Staten Island ferry) at the core task - moving people. The SeaBus is a marvel of industrial engineering, with separated passenger flows and an unusual berthing structure to facilitate that. It's shocking to me that we don't see SeaBus knock-offs popping up in harbors all over the world. The utilization of those vessels is peerless due to the quick turnaround times. But everyone (whether its Golden Gate Ferries in the Bay Area or King County Metro in Seattle) that is trying now wants a SeaBus type system without the SeaBus infrastructure and those systems are just a disappointment in comparison. And just so I'm clear here ... I would love an outside space on the SeaBus. The harbor is busy and fascinating, and there's no shortage of things to look at on a crossing. But we have to turn the question around. If we went back to the 70s, and had to do it all over again, given the budget constraints at the time, could BC have implemented SeaBus, with all the things that make it great, while also procuring vessels with an outdoor space? If you look at the current vessels, where would that space be? Up above? Bow and stern on a "stretched" vessel? Both would have increased the capital cost of building out the system. If the money wasn't there in the budget, what would you have to give up to get it? Personally, I'll take the SeaBus for what is, despite my personal lamentations that I can't stand on an open deck and view the scenery on a crossing. |
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,308
|
Post by Neil on Jun 3, 2017 22:15:07 GMT -8
I absolutely agree that Seabus has been a tremendous transit system, in terms of people carried, dependability, and how it meshes with the rest of the network. I also acknowledge that building it in the first place with an outdoor deck would have been more expensive.
However...
If we were celebrating the fortieth anniversary of a harbour ferry where people had spent decades catching a sea breeze on their way home from work, and where tourists had enjoyed the outdoor panorama of city, mountains, bridges and other marine traffic while enjoying a market at the north and possibly south end of the journey, the notion of it ever have been a boat ride where everyone was cooped up inside would be unthinkable.
I maintain: it was an opportunity lost for a truly iconic civic asset, on a world scale, and the cost would have been a pittance, amortized over the years.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kahloke on Jun 4, 2017 6:17:02 GMT -8
There is one transit system I have been on that operates very much like Seabus, and they managed to incorporate a top deck outdoor seating area. That system is the Halifax Metro ferries. They load and unload on the side, just like Seabus. The design of the vessels makes it so it is quick and easy to get to the top deck without interfering with the side doors for loading and unloading. Here are some pics to illustrate:   Side platform down for loading w/ doors to go inside the vessel on the left, and stairs to go up to the top deck fore and aft  Nice top deck with ample viewing in any direction  Stairs to get from top deck down to loading/unloading area of vessel, and look, there's somebody walking on board now  I can't vouch is Halifax Metro is more or less efficient than Seabus, but it seemed pretty quick in loading and unloading when I rode them, and the setup seemed pretty similar. |
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on Jun 4, 2017 9:09:45 GMT -8
This discussion of the last few days regarding what the SeaBus system is, and what it might have been, is a first rate example of what is best about the WCFF. We don't see a lot of good respectful discussion on the forum these days, but we do here. As much as I like good photography, discussion such as this is better. Thanks to all of you who have participated. From the Mr DOT collection ... This was previously posted a few years back. See page 13 of this thread.   |
|
|
|
Post by northwesterner on Jun 4, 2017 10:00:22 GMT -8
I absolutely agree that Seabus has been a tremendous transit system, in terms of people carried, dependability, and how it meshes with the rest of the network. I also acknowledge that building it in the first place with an outdoor deck would have been more expensive. However... If we were celebrating the fortieth anniversary of a harbour ferry where people had spent decades catching a sea breeze on their way home from work, and where tourists had enjoyed the outdoor panorama of city, mountains, bridges and other marine traffic while enjoying a market at the north and possibly south end of the journey, the notion of it ever have been a boat ride where everyone was cooped up inside would be unthinkable. I maintain: it was an opportunity lost for a truly iconic civic asset, on a world scale, and the cost would have been a pittance, amortized over the years. Thanks for this Neil. I understand your point more clearly now. I think it can be possible to both celebrate the incredible engineering and operations of the SeaBus for 40 years while lamenting how much better it could have been. |
|
|
|
Post by Dane on Jun 4, 2017 10:26:27 GMT -8
The Halifax service isn't quite as fast as SeaBus in terms of mass transit efficiency. Less points of loading / unloading, and they don't have the same "glide right in" docking system. Don't get me wrong, still efficient- just not quite as efficient as SeaBus.
|
|
). I think you would be correct in assuming that the vessel would be built by a foreign shipyard once again.
