Passenger Only Ferries

[Barnacle]

The Chinook and Snohomish were originally designed to be two-engine boats, not four; the excess weight from that (plus the accompanying fuel it takes to run those hogs) completely destroyed the waterplane area. I've only heard rumors as to how this idea came; I'm not going to spread them until I can get some further proof.

I suppose they could be re-engined--or reconfigured as two-engine boats-- to make them useful to someone, but those won't be the boats to make the S/V run work in any case. The Skagit and Kalama would be semi-feasible, but I'm told that King County doesn't want those boats either--probably because of their four-engine configuration as well.

I'm told that the state wants $4.5M for each of the fast boats; I think they'll be lucky to get that for the pair.

Your avatar isn't working, by the way.

[Nick]

Barnacle, or whoever can answer this question, are the Chinook and Snohomish running on reciprocating diesel engines, or are they on gas turbines like the Victoria Clipper ships?

The reason I ask is that was one of the reasons our Pacificats didn't quite work out was that BCF decided they didn't want to run gas turbines, even though that is what the ships were originally designed for. They chose instead to use reciprocating diesels to keep engines types standard throughout the major vessels of the fleet. Problem was the diesels were much heavier leading to wake and fuel consumption concerns.

[Barnacle]

I do believe the POFFs are packing conventional diesels, because GT-licensed engineers are kind of rare birds. Otherwise they probably wouldn't need four engines to peel off 36 knots.

[Nick]

That would make sense... Too bad they are packing all that weight.

[Emory Lindgard]

It is kind of interesting that Nichols Brother contact to do the Navy's X craft "The Seafighter" has two gas turbines for full throttle at 50 knots and two V16 diesels for cruising at lower speeds.

I could not get over the capacity of fuel that had to be carried for both types of engines.

www.nicholsboats.com/Images/x-craft/02800019.jpg

By the way Nichols I think is getting ready to launch a tugboat since their workers have come back to work after their Chapter 11. At least it is nice to see cars in their parking lot.

Emory on South Whidbey.

[Barnacle]

I hope Nichols can get the tailspin stopped--I'm not terribly familiar with their work (save for the Tyee)--but I hate to see local businesses go under.

Rumor has it that most of the havoc was caused by a company whose regular M.O. is to sue their boatbuilders so they can stay afloat.

[Political Incorrectness]

So they are going to try and delay everyone else, I can hear the Canadian National anthem being played already for where some building might be going at this rate.

[Barnacle]

Well, Nichols is (IMHO) in the lead for the Micro-boats as far as I'm concerned, if all the other local yards are 'busy for the next five years.' Nichols has the open yard space and would be grateful for the work.

[Emory Lindgard]

Nichols Brothers just launch their Tugboat.

I see another hull behind the spot the Tugboat
was standing yesterday. Don't know if it is
another Tugboat or something else being built.
I think they were building 3 tugboats so this could
be a hull from Todd shipyard for their final tugboat.

Emory on South Whidbey.

[SS San Mateo]

The Seattle - Pt. Townsend route ends Jan 6. The Snohomish will be transferred to the Pt. Townsend - Keystone route until car ferry service is restored.

www.wsdot.wa.gov/ferries/commuter_updates/index.cfm?fuseaction=press_releases_content&press_release_id=553

[Political Incorrectness]

As I have said, if those catamarans did not have 4 engines and only had two, we wouldn't be here and we would still be using them. But when someone just has to screw up, this is what happens.

[ruddernut]

Here's an idea.

How about getting the Victoria Clipper to make an additional stop at Port Townsend, and maybe the state can subsidize the fares of the in-state passengers?

Makes sense, since there's a lot of overlap between their routes, and it would be a more efficient use of resources.

[Barnacle]

Absolutely not! The state should NOT be in the business of subsidizing private industry.

Dan--we probably wouldn't still be using the Snohomish and Chinook even if they had only been built with two engines. Someone pointed out the folly of competing with ourselves on the Seattle-Bremerton run, and the notion that we don't need to steal customers from ourselves finally clicked with the powers that be. While I enjoyed the extra jobs for my union brothers and sisters, it was impractical.

[BreannaF]

ruddernut said:

Here's an idea.
How about getting the Victoria Clipper to make an additional stop at Port Townsend,

...And every trip in from Port Townsend would include a trip through US Customs in Seattle. Just my idea of fun!

Also, the Victoria Clipper is marketed as a sort of premium service for tourists, not exactly compatible with state-subsidized commuters. I doubt that they would go for it.

[ruddernut]

bryank said:

ruddernut said:

Here's an idea.
How about getting the Victoria Clipper to make an additional stop at Port Townsend,

...And every trip in from Port Townsend would include a trip through US Customs in Seattle. Just my idea of fun!

Also, the Victoria Clipper is marketed as a sort of premium service for tourists, not exactly compatible with state-subsidized commuters. I doubt that they would go for it.

Maybe WSF ought to take over the route altogether, run it as an affordable basic transport service, and keep the Victoria leg of the run for extra traffic and viability.

They could also move all customs and immigrations clearance to Victoria, couldn't they?

[Barnacle]

Doubt it. US Customs likes to pack weapons, plus I doubt Customs would be interested in relocation (or establishing a new office in a foreign land).

[FNS]

Can't use the VICTORIA CLIPPER or VICTORIA CLIPPER IV as these were built in Norway. The VICTORIA CLIPPER III could be used as she was built in the USA.

CLIPPER III did make a stop at Port Townsend about ten or so years ago on her trips to either Victoria or the San Juans (can't remember, though). I took this trip once.

You're right! There needs to be full US Immigration and Customs done in Victoria, if there is a US stop on the way to Seattle (aboard the CLIPPER III only). This is done at CYVR and other major Canadian airports on US bound travelers. This is not done at CYYJ, though, as folks go through US Customs at KSEA upon landing.

[ruddernut]

Is there some law that says WSF can't use foreign made vessels, even if they are used and second-hand?

What are they going to do if one of their ships sinks, like the Queen of the North, and an emergency replacement needs to be found ASAP, with no domestic vessels immediately available?

[BreannaF]

ruddernut said:

Is there some law that says WSF can't use foreign made vessels, even if they are used and second-hand?

What are they going to do if one of their ships sinks, like the Queen of the North, and an emergency replacement needs to be found ASAP, with no domestic vessels immediately available?

1) Sigh. The Merchant Marine Act of 1920 (commonly known as the Jones Act) says, among other things, that goods or passengers that are carried between any two US ports must be done on a US-built and US-flagged ship. The laws are strict enough that most of the replacement parts for the ships must also be of US origin. Further, the crew must be over three-quarters US citizens.

2) In that scenario that you mention, we will be using a fleet of US rowboats until a new ferry is built. The law is not very flexible.

One could speculate that the US Congress could legislate a temporary exemption to the law for a given case. But I certainly wouldn't count on that, as many would not want to see a precedent set.

In addition to that, Washington State Law says that all new WSF ferries must be built in the state. There is a slightly better chance that this law could be suspended in a true emergency situation, but I really wouldn't count on that, either.

[Northern Exploration]

barnacle said:

Doubt it. US Customs likes to pack weapons, plus I doubt Customs would be interested in relocation (or establishing a new office in a foreign land).

At all the major airports in Toronto you clear US Customs before you board the aircraft. Once inside that security zone you are treated as if you are on US soil. To leave that zone you have to exit through Canada Customs even if you never left on an aircraft.

[ruddernut]

bryank said:

ruddernut said:

Is there some law that says WSF can't use foreign made vessels, even if they are used and second-hand?

What are they going to do if one of their ships sinks, like the Queen of the North, and an emergency replacement needs to be found ASAP, with no domestic vessels immediately available?

1) Sigh. The Merchant Marine Act of 1920 (commonly known as the Jones Act) says, among other things, that goods or passengers that are carried between any two US ports must be done on a US-built and US-flagged ship. The laws are strict enough that most of the replacement parts for the ships must also be of US origin. Further, the crew must be over three-quarters US citizens.

2) In that scenario that you mention, we will be using a fleet of US rowboats until a new ferry is built. The law is not very flexible.

One could speculate that the US Congress could legislate a temporary exemption to the law for a given case. But I certainly wouldn't count on that, as many would not want to see a precedent set.

In addition to that, Washington State Law says that all new WSF ferries must be built in the state. There is a slightly better chance that this law could be suspended in a true emergency situation, but I really wouldn't count on that, either.

They don't have any similar laws governing land or air transport, do they? As far as I'm aware, transit systems and Amtrak in the US have no problem using Bombardier trains, and airlines can fly Airbus.

The marine shipping industry should cite this law as unfair and have it repealed.

That's too bad, by the way. In another thread, I mentioned that I was hoping we could put our petty nationalistic differences aside and build a super shipyard in the region that would rival those in Germany and abroad, and serve both BC and WA ferry companies.

[SS San Mateo]

bryank said:

One could speculate that the US Congress could legislate a temporary exemption to the law for a given case. But I certainly wouldn't count on that, as many would not want to see a precedent set.

This has happened before. AMHS was able to get a temporary waiver for the MV Wickersham (ex Stenna Brittanica), but only because her replacement (MV Columbia) was under construction at the time. More at:

www.sitnews.us/0706news/070806/070806_marine_highway.html

[Mill Bay]

Port Townsend-Seattle ferry service ends Sunday (...and starts again on Wednesday?...)

(This is poor writing, and doesn't make sense. Is the Snohomish leaving or staying?)

Associated Press - January 4, 2008 4:05 PM ET

PORT TOWNSEND, Wash. (AP) - Sunday is the final day for the Port Townsend-Seattle ferry service.

The state ferry system started running the passenger-only ferry Snohomish on the route on Dec. 13 to help make up for canceling the Port Townsend-Keystone car ferry service after the old Steel Electric class ferries were docked with hull corrosion.

After maintenance, the 149-passenger Snohomish will go on the Port Townsend-Keystone route on Wednesday, replacing a smaller foot-ferry.

Later this month or February, the state hopes to have a leased 54-car ferry on the route between Port Townsend and Whidbey Island.


Information from: Peninsula Daily News,

Copyright 2008 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

[Koastal Karl]

It would appear to me that the Snohomish is staying on the route till that 54 car ferry arrives and takes over. Sunday is the final day for the PT to Seattle service then she goes back to PT to Keystone route till the other ferry arrives. That is what it sounds like.

[Barnacle]

Mill Bay, read the article a bit more carefully.

It says that Sunday is the last day for Seattle-Port Townsend service; once through with maintenance, the Snohomish will return to the Keystone-Port Townsend route.

Mind you, it IS poorly written.