|
|
Post by WettCoast on Sept 18, 2018 9:33:21 GMT -8
Vancouver SeaBus Burrard Otter II nears its North Shore terminal @ Londsdale Quay - 5 September 2018
|
|
|
|
Post by paulvanb on Dec 3, 2018 9:41:40 GMT -8
The Pacific Breeze at sunrise.  |
|
|
|
Post by paulvanb on Dec 4, 2018 9:06:03 GMT -8
Shot this in 4K over the last two days. At 2.2gb of file size and taking the better part of an hour to upload to Youtube, not sure if I will try this again. Finished product at only 720p - don't know why.
|
|
|
|
Post by Blue Bus Fan on Jan 1, 2019 16:05:58 GMT -8
SeaBus will see massive growth in 2019:
1. Brand new SeaBus will be delivered and enter service.
2. 10 minutes headway in peak periods when the new SeaBus enter service.
|
|
|
|
Post by whalebreath on Jan 1, 2019 20:45:01 GMT -8
SeaBus will see massive growth in 2019: 1. Brand new SeaBus will be delivered and enter service. 2. 10 minutes headway in peak periods when the new SeaBus enter service. Thanks for this-the Seabus has always been underrated both as a transit option and a harbour mini cruise for visitors. For once more really is better. |
|
Neil
Voyager 
Posts: 7,308
|
Post by Neil on Jan 1, 2019 22:34:01 GMT -8
SeaBus will see massive growth in 2019: 1. Brand new SeaBus will be delivered and enter service. 2. 10 minutes headway in peak periods when the new SeaBus enter service. Thanks for this-the Seabus has always been underrated both as a transit option and a harbour mini cruise for visitors. For once more really is better. At the risk of being tedious and repetitive, I'll repeat once again what I've said in the past; Seabus was poorly designed, and offers next to no attraction to tourists, because you can't go outside. Imagine an outside deck on a summer day, with the mountains, city, and sky, and you can envision what didn't happen with this crossing, in one of the world's most beautiful harbours. |
|
|
|
Post by Starsteward on Jan 2, 2019 3:28:22 GMT -8
Thanks for this-the Seabus has always been underrated both as a transit option and a harbour mini cruise for visitors. For once more really is better. At the risk of being tedious and repetitive, I'll repeat once again what I've said in the past; Seabus was poorly designed, and offers next to no attraction to tourists, because you can't go outside. Imagine an outside deck on a summer day, with the mountains, city, and sky, and you can envision what didn't happen with this crossing, in one of the world's most beautiful harbours. Yes, we are missing a glorious opportunity to showcase a 'postcard' land-seascape during most of the year. Even a bright cool/cold sunny day in winter with snow on the Northshore mountains is visual treat worth a thousand words. There are many cities worldwide that have passenger only ferries that have made it a 'tourist must-see' to not only get from one location to another but actually make trips to the various ferry destinations a very cheap way of experiencing the sights, smells and sounds of a part of the world which one may never get the chance to visit again in a life-time. If anyone has been down-under to the beautiful, exciting city of Sydney, Australia, wended your way down to Circular Quai and hopped on one of the any yellow and green Sydney Ferry Boats they will take you around one of the most scenic harbours in the world. Pass under the Sydney Harbour Bridge with its gigantic Australian flag flying from the centre-span, have your cameras at the ready and maybe you'll catch sight of a group of 'bridge-tekkers' as they make their way up the curve of steel superstructure to the apex of the bridge. Ah, I can just hear a ditty or two sung by the Irish Rovers who definitely have some 'fun' describing the fun aboard the 'Sidney Ferry Boats'. We are wasting such a grand opportunity here in Vancouver, but who says that with some strong and persistent public input the design of future Sea-Buses could become a tourist attraction in themselves. (And the future design could be worked to fit the existing terminal structures so let's not be distracted with that argument).  |
|
|
|
Post by Kahloke on Jan 2, 2019 7:27:25 GMT -8
Yes, we are missing a glorious opportunity to showcase a 'postcard' land-seascape during most of the year. Even a bright cool/cold sunny day in winter with snow on the Northshore mountains is visual treat worth a thousand words. There are many cities worldwide that have passenger only ferries that have made it a 'tourist must-see' to not only get from one location to another but actually make trips to the various ferry destinations a very cheap way of experiencing the sights, smells and sounds of a part of the world which one may never get the chance to visit again in a life-time. Absolutely! If you ever visit Halifax, their Metro ferries operate very much like Seabus with the side loading ramps, but those little ferries have an upper deck that is outside, with direct stair access to the embarkation/disembarkation stations on the sides of the vessel. It's very efficient, and proves that a Seabus-like setup would still work with an upper deck. |
|
|
|
Post by Blue Bus Fan on Jan 2, 2019 12:27:08 GMT -8
I have to say outer deck would have needless costs associated with because they would need rescue boat and more crew to operate the boat. I would prefer TransLink to add more service than needless spending money on tourists that don’t help fund the system.
|
|
|
|
Post by timmyc on Jan 2, 2019 16:47:13 GMT -8
"tourists that don’t help fund the system."
Tourists may well pay more per trip than regular users of the system, since they don't use monthly cards or UPasses. The exception would be daypass trips, but even then they're paying more much per day than a regular Vancouverite doing a 3-zone commute.
|
|
|
|
Post by Blue Bus Fan on Jan 2, 2019 17:57:04 GMT -8
"tourists that don’t help fund the system." Tourists may well pay more per trip than regular users of the system, since they don't use monthly cards or UPasses. The exception would be daypass trips, but even then they're paying more much per day than a regular Vancouverite doing a 3-zone commute. But they don’t pay taxes to help subsidize or expand the system. So they don’t pay their fair share to help expand and operate the system |
|
|
|
Post by Mike on Jan 2, 2019 18:18:12 GMT -8
"tourists that don’t help fund the system." Tourists may well pay more per trip than regular users of the system, since they don't use monthly cards or UPasses. The exception would be daypass trips, but even then they're paying more much per day than a regular Vancouverite doing a 3-zone commute. But they don’t pay taxes to help subsidize or expand the system. So they don’t pay their fair share to help expand and operate the system How is tourists paying regular fares to use our transit system not their "fair share"? They don't live here and can't be expected to pay extra taxes. |
|
|
|
Post by Blue Bus Fan on Jan 2, 2019 18:40:26 GMT -8
But they don’t pay taxes to help subsidize or expand the system. So they don’t pay their fair share to help expand and operate the system How is tourists paying regular fares to use our transit system not their "fair share"? They don't live here and can't be expected to pay extra taxes. Because why should tourist be one ones to benefit from local taxpayer when buses and SkyTrain are full during most day that money should be use to expand service which help both local and tourist. I don’t see how having an out deck refit on SeaBus would help local residents. |
|
|
|
Post by Mike C on Jan 2, 2019 19:04:06 GMT -8
How is tourists paying regular fares to use our transit system not their "fair share"? They don't live here and can't be expected to pay extra taxes. Because why should tourist be one ones to benefit from local taxpayer when buses and SkyTrain are full during most day that money should be use to expand service which help both local and tourist. I don’t see how having an out deck refit on SeaBus would help local residents. You are aware that tourism generated approximately $1.1 billion in tax revenue in 2016, and has consistently gone up year over year? You are additionally aware that tourism spending in BC was approximately $17 billion that same year? The premise of this argument is bizarre. I don’t have the numbers in front of me, but tourists pay substantially into our transit system - as Tim said, likely more than the average commuter, and additionally so when they fly into Vancouver Airport and pay the $5 AddFare. Consider that most (all?) transit-operated ferry systems in North America have outer decks on their ships, from San Francisco to New York. I can’t speak to the design viability, but I do genuinely think that making the SeaBus more of a tourism draw and creating additional revenue in our transit system is a very good thing. |
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on Jan 2, 2019 20:59:54 GMT -8
Tourists that use the SeaBuses tend to do so during non-peak times. Most tourists are out & about mid day rather than competing for space with the multitude of commuters during the morning & evening rush hours.
Retrofitting terminals to allow loading/off loading from an open upper deck (on some future vessels that have upper decks) seems very unlikely and would probably be very expensive to accomplish. As desirable as it might be I don't think you will see any changes of this sort any time soon.
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,308
|
Post by Neil on Jan 3, 2019 23:03:37 GMT -8
Tourists that use the SeaBuses tend to do so during non-peak times. Most tourists are out & about mid day rather than competing for space with the multitude of commuters during the morning & evening rush hours. Retrofitting terminals to allow loading/off loading from an open upper deck (on some future vessels that have upper decks) seems very unlikely and would probably be very expensive to accomplish. As desirable as it might be I don't think you will see any changes of this sort any time soon. I agree... it's not likely to happen. Frankly, though, it surprises me that there hasn't been more public regret over the design of this system. As 'Kahloke' points out, so many other cities have recognized the value of making their seagoing buses a part of city life beyond just the transit aspect, and where you charge for the passage, tourism can certainly pay its way, despite what 'Blue Bus Fan' asserts. |
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on Feb 10, 2019 17:18:12 GMT -8
SeaBus Burrard Otter II en route across Vancouver Harbour from the North Shore to the city.
9 February 2019
|
|
|
|
Post by Blue Bus Fan on Feb 10, 2019 18:03:35 GMT -8
They finally removed the ugly ad wraps on SeaBus. Did all three SeaBus get rid of Shaw Wifi ads?
|
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on Feb 10, 2019 22:40:42 GMT -8
Burrard Beaver still had those advertising wraps as of yesterday.
|
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on Mar 9, 2019 18:06:18 GMT -8
SeaBus Burrard Beaver, complete with ad wraps, en route across Vancouver Harbour from north to south shore - 9 February 2019.
This is one of two original 1970's SeaBus vessels, the only one still in service. The containership in the background is the APL Paris.
|
|
|
|
Post by Starsteward on Mar 13, 2019 10:20:28 GMT -8
SeaBus Burrard Otter II en route across Vancouver Harbour from the North Shore to the city.
9 February 2019
Members have opined countless times how we have lost the opportunity to offer outdoor viewing during harbor crossings. Looking at the shot of the 'Burrard Otter II, I'm going to offer a totally illogical idea as to how outdoor viewing 'might' be accomplished without having to spend a King's ransom on retro-fitting vessels, terminals etc. Is it possible to add a 2 stairways from the main passenger cabin up to the open deck above it? Obviously there would have to be some modifications to that open space above the main seating area but? Passengers could go upstairs to the open deck for viewing and return to the main deck prior to disembarking, hence no need for modifications to the terminals. In future, perhaps Sea buses could be designed from scratch to include this possible amenity. I'm probably as 'wet' as the foam splashing up from the 'Burrard Otter II's' transit, but this particular sunny-day shot provided by 'Wett Coast', just got me reflecting on what a fabulous opportunity we had, way back when, to do what so many other transit systems, worldwide have done. What we missed out doing years ago doesn't mean that things can't be changed in the future can it? |
|
|
|
Post by Dane on Mar 14, 2019 18:24:08 GMT -8
Burrard Chinook is the new SeaBus name. I like it! A fusion of West Coast but sort of in-line with the original names from the HMS Beaver and Otter.
|
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on Mar 14, 2019 19:19:34 GMT -8
Burrard Chinook is the new SeaBus name. I like it! A fusion of West Coast but sort of in-line with the original names from the HMS Beaver and Otter. I like the name also Dane.
The namesakes of the original 1970's SeaBuses were not, however, blessed with the prefix 'HMS' as they were never ships of the Royal Navy. They were ships of the HBC 'navy'. |
|
|
|
Post by Blue Bus Fan on Mar 14, 2019 20:46:25 GMT -8
I have Burrard Chinook is an odd choice for name but one that I love. Burrard Chinook does fitted in naming system better than Burrard Pacific Breeze.
TransLink hopes to have Burrard Chinook in service by summer which then start ten minutes frequency in peak hours. The earliest I can see her entering service in June on of day of service change for bus routes.
|
|
|
|
Post by timmyc on Mar 15, 2019 9:39:48 GMT -8
|
|
