General BCFerries facts, trivia & history

[Neil]

For years, we were told that Washington State Ferries' Jumbo Mark 2 vessels were the "biggest double enders in the world", by virtue of their being all of three feet longer than our C class boats.

But was that actually the truth?

WSF doesn't give the tonnage figures for the Mark-2's on their stats pages. The Jumbos, however, weigh in at 3246 gross, 1198 net. They are only three feet less in beam than the Mark-2's, and twenty feet shorter.

The Queen of Oak Bay, for instance, is listed at 6968 gross, 3246 net. Is it possible that the Mark-2's, only twenty feet longer than the Jumbos, could be twice their tonnage, matching our C's? I doubt it.

'Bigness' is not just a matter of length. Our C's have 2 1/2 car decks, while I believe the Mark-2's have 1 1/2. That makes for a lot of extra bulk. When massive new cruise ships are launched, it's usually their 150,000 (or whatever) tons that is just as significant as their length.

The Puyallup is three feet longer than the Queen of Oak Bay. Their breadth is virtually identical. In terms of mass, and displacement, I wouldn't be surprised if our C's were always by far the biggest double enders. And I think that's what counts.

Contrary figures and opinions welcome. And a question: is there an American counterpart to our Transport Canada site, where one can get facts and figures on American registered vessels?

[Curtis]

I feel as though there is some inaccuracy on the Largest Double-Ender, The Mk. II's are the Longest The "C" Class are the Largest Due to the extra car deck.

Now that the Coastals are Here the Confusion can mostly stop.

[EGfleet]

hornbyguy said:

For years, we were told that Washington State Ferries' Jumbo Mark 2 vessels were the "biggest double enders in the world", by virtue of their being all of three feet longer than our C class boats.

But was that actually the truth?

WSF doesn't give the tonnage figures for the Mark-2's on their stats pages. The Jumbos, however, weigh in at 3246 gross, 1198 net. They are only three feet less in beam than the Mark-2's, and twenty feet shorter.

The Queen of Oak Bay, for instance, is listed at 6968 gross, 3246 net. Is it possible that the Mark-2's, only twenty feet longer than the Jumbos, could be twice their tonnage, matching our C's? I doubt it.

'Bigness' is not just a matter of length. Our C's have 2 1/2 car decks, while I believe the Mark-2's have 1 1/2. That makes for a lot of extra bulk. When massive new cruise ships are launched, it's usually their 150,000 (or whatever) tons that is just as significant as their length.

The Puyallup is three feet longer than the Queen of Oak Bay. Their breadth is virtually identical. In terms of mass, and displacement, I wouldn't be surprised if our C's were always by far the biggest double enders. And I think that's what counts.

Contrary figures and opinions welcome. And a question: is there an American counterpart to our Transport Canada site, where one can get facts and figures on American registered vessels?

Tacoma's stats:
Deadweight:1393
Gross Tonnage(GRT):3926
Net Tonnage(NRT):2066
Gross Tonnage(GT ITC): 12,689

You can find all the other answers here:
cgmix.uscg.mil/PSIX/VesselSearch.aspx


And yes, with the arrival of the Super C's it's a moot point anyway.

[Nick]

I think that those claims are always put out for the average joe. When most people look at a ship, they gauge size by length and width, and possibly height, and don't really think of things like mass. In that case, the Mark IIs win out, and that claim of largest double ender can be substantiated. When people like us compare, we look at more hard numbers, like gross and net tonnage, and claims like that are harder to substantiate.

[Neil]

Evergreenfleet has given us the figures- for gross and net tonnage, the Mark-2s are substantially less than the C class vessels. If you saw them side by side, the C's would be virtually identical in length and breadth, but noticeably taller. Would be interesting to compare them out of water, in drydock.

[Dane]

Hi guys,

Was reading some old BC Ferries material and I learned a lot of things that were new to me; while I am certain they’re not new to all I thought I would share the ones that “stood out.”

- Despite BC Ferries taking over Salt Water routes from Highways starting in October 1985, the last vessel wasn’t accounted for until 31 Dec 86 – a very long transition period;
- When the Vancouver and Victoria were lifted there was no immediate plans for the Esquimalt and Saanich to be lifted, it did not even appear as a budget items so it must have been a late decision;
- All the V/Bs had their hull plating substantially renewed at the time of the Vic/Van/Esq/Saan’s lifting
- Throughout the 80s the Burn, Nan and New Wet were classified as “Stretch Class”
- Throughout the early-80s the C Class were grouped together, with a distinction of the Coqu/Cow/Oak/Sur as the “Jumbo’s,” or in one report the Coqu and Cow as “Jumbo’s” and the Oak and Sur as “Super Jumbos,” and in one planning report of a third corssing as…. Super C’s!
- The Queen of New West was referred to as a Super V basically throughout the entire 1980s
- The preliminary drawings for the Cap/Cumb are nearly identical to the exterior design of the Island Sky, something which I found incredible; I had always found myself feeling she was a step back as far as appearance was concerned.
- After the completion and integration of the Oak Bay and Surrey into the fleet the Coquitlam and Cowichan were posted full time to Rte 1, although that as short lived for at least one of the two vessels.
- Throughout all the reports the Queen of the North, Queen of Prince Rupert, all the V’s, ad all the B’s should have left the fleet by now – all forward looking statements saw a Super C being built, not Fast Cats, that’s common knowledge but it was strange to read what actually should have happened being scheduled over 10 years earlier.
- All the C Class had $2/mill a piece spent on them for new clutches because of reliability… that obviously didn’t work out
- BC Ferries once had 6 routes out with private contractors, much in the same manner as the current contracts. That was totally news to me.
- The North Island Princess survived with staterooms until 1989
- BC Ferries did not own the Queen of Surrey until 2006, and the Queen of Oak Bay until 2007.

The most interest thing I read was the efficiency program started in the recession of 1982-1984/5ish when BC Ferries cut down the number of sailings very substantially to about the levels we have now, however with the addition of the later C Class capacity (# of cars moved in 24 hrs) was maintained throughout, this is most notable on Rte 2 and 3 where the C Class replaced vessels and sailings on a 2:1 ratio. Yet, only one and two years earlier the system had added immense capacity with the lifting of the four Vs in addition to the new C Class; by 1989 Rte 1 and 2 were described as “at saturation.” A very complicated set of events with a lot of rapid change…. As a result of all of this as well, was the Alberni’s lifting which as it seems at least from BCFC’s perspective was done as an efficiency measure, not as a necessity of capacity, with the Alberni going to Rte 3 it was hoped that two B’s (Burnaby/New West) would become surplus to needs, which they did for a period.

I realize this is not new for many, but it was to me so I thought I would share. Perhaps people that can remember the early 80s can shed some more light.

Cheers

Dane

[Curtis]

Those are some intresting facts. I'm most Surprised by the fact that the Capilano/Cumberland Designs are similar to the Island Sky, and also by the fact that Staterooms Lasted on the NIP until 1989.
I knew that the Oaky and Slurrey weren't fully owned by BC Ferries until recently, but I don't exactly understand why. Wasn't it a lease or something?

[Hardy]

prqueenkid16 said:

Oaky and Slurrey weren't fully owned by BC Ferries until recently, but I don't exactly understand why. Wasn't it a lease or something?

Concisely - yes. The purchase/finance arrangements had BCF as the leasee and the buyout was far more recent than most people realized. As with all leases, title only changes at that point.

[Neil]

Dane- re "... six routes out with private contractors"- Are you refering to the Lady Rose, Uchuck, and others?

[markkarj]

Dane: do you have the reports scanned that I might take a look at?

If not, no bother... thought I'd ask.

M

[Dane]

hornbyguy said:

Dane- re "... six routes out with private contractors"- Are you refering to the Lady Rose, Uchuck, and others?

... I think so.... but I am not sure? I have the routes written down and will post them shortly.

Sorry no scans, if there is anything you are particularly interested in let me know and I can scan it. They're publically available at SFU's Burnaby Mnt Campus.