Nick
Voyager
Chief Engineer - Queen of Richmond
Posts: 2,078
|
Post by Nick on Mar 4, 2012 18:49:04 GMT -8
If they were forced to use Langdale's reserve single level berth as the 'primary berth' for an extended period of time, they could do it. I do believe that it would be a royal pain, however. Am I right in believing that only the Cowichan & Coquitlam have the internal ramps? If the Surrey (& Oak Bay) do not have these than vessels would have to be transferred around. How much more 'port time' would would be required to unload/load a C class at Langdale using the single level berth? How many round trips might be lost over the day as a result? I believe that each of the major terminals on the south coast ought to have at least two fully functional berths. With BCFS admitting to a dozen hard landing per year, this would seem to be a prudent course of action. Firstly, even though BCF may admit to 12 "hard landings" per year, this is the first time one has knocked a berth out of commission for an extended period of time. I'm trying, and I honestly can't think of a time when a major terminal berth has been closed longer other than for planned maintenance/upgrades. I'm thinking that BCF is taking their time fixing Duke Point since all the traffic is flowing through Departure Bay quite nicely. This incident has given them a nice opportunity to test out a winter closing of Duke Point without pissing too many people off. If Langdale did get knocked out, I'm fairly certain that more effort would be put in to fixing it on a tighter time frame, since there isn't another option other than single deck loading.
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Mar 4, 2012 19:14:28 GMT -8
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 4, 2012 20:40:48 GMT -8
I'm not sure how 'seriously messed up' you mean. i.e a 4 month closure? Sure, service would be messed up to a degree but this is why we have ramps on the C Class. Of course, there would only be 7 sailings a day (as it was during the November closure), but the money is hard to come by to justify such an upgrade....Mike Corrigan that "to take Langdale to the next level is probably going to cost upwards of $50 million"[Coast Reporter, December 16th 2011] I guess I could be ignoring the issue since it's never happened before on the Sunshine Coast, however, I think BC Ferries would probably hire more manpower to get the docked fixed quickly if a similar incident happened in Langdale. Correct me if i'm wrong, but it seems they are 'taking their time' to repair the berth at Duke Point. White Coast - there's your answer. As for time in dock, I was in Langdale and it takes them a good 50 minutes to an hour, but the modified schedule allows this. However, with uninformed customers, and a revised sailing in between two regularly scheduled sailings (i.e.: the 11:25 am ex. Langdale is in between the regular 10:20 and 12:20 sailings), people just keep on showing up at the terminal and it ends up being a full sailing. This is what I observed last November 5th. Finally, some time is made up at HSB and I can tell you they do NOT save fuel in this case - they'll sail at 20-21 kts, whereas they will sail at 16.5-17 kts when they are on time with a light load (about 50% full or less).
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Mar 7, 2012 7:55:03 GMT -8
|
|
Ferryman
Voyager
Posts: 7,473
Member is Online
|
Post by Ferryman on Mar 7, 2012 10:11:59 GMT -8
As a side note, I guess this means that Duke Point is now Coastalized? Could have sworn I saw Dogwood Carpets in the waiting lounge last time I was there in...2010?
|
|
Koastal Karl
Voyager
Been on every BC Ferry now!!!!!
Posts: 7,747
|
Post by Koastal Karl on Mar 29, 2012 20:06:41 GMT -8
when is Duke Point scheduled to be reopen??
|
|
|
Post by Scott (Former Account) on Mar 29, 2012 20:13:32 GMT -8
when is Duke Point scheduled to be reopen?? There is no firm date, but it should be sometime in mid-April.
|
|
Koastal Karl
Voyager
Been on every BC Ferry now!!!!!
Posts: 7,747
|
Post by Koastal Karl on Mar 29, 2012 20:53:14 GMT -8
ah ok that is good to know! I thought I heard April 1st somewhere but I could of been wrong. Still havent got on route 30 while it's going out of Departure Bay that's why I was wondering.
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Apr 13, 2012 7:41:30 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Apr 19, 2012 13:55:58 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by Scott (Former Account) on Apr 23, 2012 10:45:43 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on May 1, 2012 8:26:53 GMT -8
Duke Point's first 2 sailings of "re-opening day" today were both on time.
Good start.
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on May 1, 2012 9:27:40 GMT -8
Duke Point was out of service for more than 4 months. That was indeed a 'hard landing'.
Do we know what measures have been taken to prevent a re-occurrence?
Has a decision been made regarding routine Duke Point closures over the off-season in future?
|
|
|
Post by DENelson83 on May 1, 2012 14:58:48 GMT -8
Do we know what measures have been taken to prevent a re-occurrence? Build the second berth?
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on May 1, 2012 15:16:27 GMT -8
Do we know what measures have been taken to prevent a re-occurrence? Build the second berth? A second berth might prevent a shutting down of the terminal, but it would not do anything to stop a ferry crashing into the berth. The goal is to prevent the ferry from loosing navigational control.
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on May 1, 2012 15:31:40 GMT -8
Build the second berth? A second berth might prevent a shutting down of the terminal, but it would not do anything to stop a ferry crashing into the berth. The goal is to prevent the ferry from loosing navigational control. I'll modify that goal slightly: - the goal is to allow enough time to react and to implement back-up systems, in the event that some primary equipment malfunctions. When they're zooming into the berth (yes, an exaggeration), they don't have time for backup measures to take effect.
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on May 1, 2012 16:32:02 GMT -8
I'll modify that goal slightly: - the goal is to allow enough time to react and to implement back-up systems, in the event that some primary equipment malfunctions. When they're zooming into the berth (yes, an exaggeration), they don't have time for backup measures to take effect. Yes, I agree with the modification. The lack of time to take emergency corrective action has been cited as critical in this accident. It would be nice to know if BCFS has actually modified their docking procedures for the Coastal class vessels. Also, it would be nice to know how they would deal with a failure of the prop pitch control equipment while navigating in the close quarters of Active Pass, for example, where another large ferry is passing by at very close range.
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on May 1, 2012 19:49:39 GMT -8
The art of not answering questions... The following is quoted from the Tidal Station Blog: tidalstation.blogspot.ca/2011/12/about-that-awesome-ferry-crash.htmlThe quote within the quote originates from the The Glosten Associates report for BC Ferries entitled Due Diligence Review of the Super C Class Ferry. One sentence has been bolded by me to draw attention to it. What has BCFS done to prevent a re-occurrence of this type of incident, or a possibly worse one such as could happen in the busy & confined channel between Mayne & Galiano Islands?
|
|
|
Post by Scott (Former Account) on May 2, 2012 0:43:45 GMT -8
Since the Inspiration's incident, the Coastals are now entering Mode 2 earlier prior to nearing their terminals. For example, when Route 30 was running via Departure Bay, the Inspiration (prior to her refit at VDD) and later the Renaissance would both be in Mode 2 by the time the vessel was passing Jesse Island at the entrance to Departure Bay.
Theoretically, the earlier the vessel is placed into Mode 2 upon approach to the terminal, the more time for corrective action should an issue arise.
I'll resist the temptation to double post, but I would like to say kudos to everyone at Departure Bay and Duke Point, as well as the Route 30 crews who made everything run so smoothly over the last few months!
|
|
|
Post by hwy19man on May 28, 2012 15:44:11 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by gordon on May 29, 2012 8:51:45 GMT -8
interesting read.
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on Nov 29, 2012 18:22:50 GMT -8
I have copied this over to this thread as there is at least one common factor in the two so-called hard landings that happened late in 2011. The TSB report linked above re the Coquitlam accident makes it clear that the ship's Master tried to put the vessel into 'mode 2' too late (i.e. after the point designated in the Vessel Specific Manual re this ship's approach to Departure Bay). When it was clear that 'mode 2' was not available, they did not have adequate time to take effective corrective actions. It will be interesting to see the TSB final report re the C Inspiration collision with the berth at Duke Point which happened only about one month later. It is my understanding that in this incident they also had inadequate time to take effective corrective action once they realized that they did not have normal control of the CI's propulsion system as they approached the berth.
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on Mar 12, 2013 18:57:41 GMT -8
Here's the article related to the wrapping up of the TSB report on the Coastal Inspiration's crash back in December 2011. The TSB mentioned that crews weren't trained with onboard emergency controls... www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/story/2013/03/12/bc-ferries-tsb-duk-point-crash.html...recall that 'not enough training' (says the TSB) was also a factor back when the Queen of the North crashed. Either crews still aren't being properly trained, or they have too many electronics to work with? I don't know what bridge crews have to say about it, but the amount of devices on the Coastal's bridges seems to be overkill for a 1.5hr crossing. This latest report from the TSB cites training issues. It also and most importantly cites the failure by crew (read senior officers) to follow the procedures written in the VSM and directives from the vessel's senior master, specifically when to engage Mode 2, the requirement to test Mode 2 immediately after engagement, etc. The recent report into the hard landing of the Queen of Coquitlam at Departure Bay (November 2011) cites much the same issues. It is interesting that this new TSB report ( CI at Duke Point) says nothing about the Coastal class propulsion system design. Recall this warning given to BCFS by The Glosten Associates in their report prepared for BC Ferries entitled Due Diligence Review of the Super C Class FerryThis incident at Duke Point with the Coastal Inspiration was no doubt an expensive one for BCFS. As bad as it was, it could have been much more serious with injuries to those on board and berth attendants too.
|
|
mrdot
Voyager
Mr. DOT
Posts: 1,252
|
Post by mrdot on Mar 12, 2013 19:30:25 GMT -8
:)further to this latest hard landing report of inadequaquate training, I note that the Oueen of the North's quartermaster's wheelhouse training was non-existaqnt, at least, a whole lot different than my time on QPR etc. many of the bad incidents on our coast can be traced to improper knowledge of the situation at hand! mrdot. Here's the article related to the wrapping up of the TSB report on the Coastal Inspiration's crash back in December 2011. The TSB mentioned that crews weren't trained with onboard emergency controls... www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/story/2013/03/12/bc-ferries-tsb-duk-point-crash.html...recall that 'not enough training' (says the TSB) was also a factor back when the Queen of the North crashed. Either crews still aren't being properly trained, or they have too many electronics to work with? I don't know what bridge crews have to say about it, but the amount of devices on the Coastal's bridges seems to be overkill for a 1.5hr crossing. This latest report from the TSB cites training issues. It also and most importantly cites the failure by crew (read senior officers) to follow the procedures written in the VSM and directives from the vessel's senior master, specifically when to engage Mode 2, the requirement to test Mode 2 immediately after engagement, etc. The recent report into the hard landing of the Queen of Coquitlam at Departure Bay (November 2011) cites much the same issues. It is interesting that this new TSB report ( CI at Duke Point) says nothing about the Coastal class propulsion system design. Recall this warning given to BCFS by The Glosten Associates in their report prepared for BC Ferries entitled Due Diligence Review of the Super C Class FerryThis incident at Duke Point with the Coastal Inspiration was no doubt an expensive one for BCFS. As bad as it was, it could have been much more serious with injuries to those on board and berth attendants too.
|
|
|
Post by gordon on Mar 13, 2013 7:03:07 GMT -8
There does seem to be training familiarization problem here, the CI's crews should have been trained for all eventualities especially after the Queen of the North sinking.
|
|