|
Post by Kahloke on Aug 31, 2012 18:24:10 GMT -8
I just saw something really interesting in WSF Chief David Mosely's Weekly Update, a presentation from BC Ferries on their Vessel Replacement Program, dated August 30, 2012. It was presented to the Washington State Legislature Joint Transportation Committee. Apparently, the Joint Transportation Committee, WSF, and BC Ferries have been meeting to discuss possible oppourtunites between the two ferry systems. They met on August 30th where WSF presented their new ferry program (i.e. the 144's), BC Ferries presented their ferry replacement program plan, and both discussed the possible use of LNG in their fleets, since both operators have been studying that option. Anyway, I thought I would post the link to BC Ferries presentation. For the first time,it shows a couple of renderings of what some of the replacement vessels could look like. That's not to say that this is what they will end up with, of course, but it's the first time I have seen any pictures linked with possible new-builds. This document is a fascinating read, and rather than extract bits and pieces from it, I am posting a link to it so you can read it in its entirety. www.wsdot.wa.gov/NR/rdonlyres/5BC81CC2-B8FE-4E4A-9C0C-72DB27354CB4/0/BCFerriesPresentationVRP_083012.pdf
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Aug 31, 2012 18:45:32 GMT -8
I just saw something really interesting in WSF Chief David Mosely's Weekly Update, a presentation from BC Ferries on their Vessel Replacement Program, dated August 30, 2012. Many thanks for that great find. The chart on page-8 of that PDF is fascinating stuff. Here is a copy of that chart: And here's what the Burnaby / Nanaimo replacement MIGHT look like (the top "Carrier Princess" style is what might happen if they do a "Like for Like replacement re vessel capacity) - the bottom 2 ships are what MIGHT replace the Bowen Class & Howe Sound Queen.
|
|
|
Post by Scott (Former Account) on Aug 31, 2012 19:10:10 GMT -8
Interesting to see the Huiimaa, FSG's Super Shuttle and what appears to be another FSG design for a single-ender... Hmmmmmmmm...
|
|
|
Post by Kahloke on Aug 31, 2012 19:48:41 GMT -8
Scott, Mr. Ferrynut and I will have to wait a few more years more to follow new ferry building. Ahh poop.. Was hoping to start following a new ferry being built next year. I guess you'll have to make do with the Olympic Class vessels currently under construction for WSF until the new-build programme in BC resumes. The first of the 144's is supposed to be delivered in 2014.
|
|
|
Post by Dane on Aug 31, 2012 19:49:31 GMT -8
This plan isn't worth the bandwidth it is printed on, but nonetheless interesting. BC Ferries has no money to get anything rolling right now, and to do replacements in 2016 would require action now-ish, particularly if they're going to be built in BC.
The next election will be, in my opinion, critical to the fleet's renewal strategy among several other important issues.
Why did WSF have this? Are the dreams of potential commonality still afloat? Would be a great idea, but would require flexibility from both sides even if only modular sections were shared rather than total vessel design.
Where is the Wack? I love the question marks. Seems BCF knows as much as we do haha
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,171
|
Post by Neil on Aug 31, 2012 21:04:02 GMT -8
I think this is kind of like the Alternate Service Provider charade- BC Ferries has to be seen to be considering all options for fleet redevelopment and provision of service. Other than exchanging technology on the use of LNG, I don't see any commonality in what the two fleets are proposing to build.
The disturbing aspect of these plans- and in this case I hope Dane is right about the pie in the sky nature of this document- is that there is virtually no planning for future traffic needs. They're even proposing replacing the current 240 (combined) vehicle capacity on routes 17 & 18 with 170. We don't design bridges or highways that way; we shouldn't be doing it with ferries, either.
|
|
|
Post by lmtengs on Aug 31, 2012 21:25:42 GMT -8
And here's what the Burnaby / Nanaimo replacement MIGHT look like (the top "Carrier Princess" style is what might happen if they do a "Like for Like replacement re vessel capacity) - the bottom 2 ships are what MIGHT replace the Bowen Class & Howe Sound Queen. I'm really liking the design for the Nanaimo/Burnaby replacement. Looks like overheight clearance will be quite high. Has BCF trashed plans for building a purposely designed Northern Discovery then? I would assume she'd look similar to the B-class replacement, but maybe with a closed car deck, and less length to reduce capacity. According to the document, they're considering a passenger-only vessel for route 9A as an alternative. I guess this would be chartered out. Also mentions potentiality of replacing the Nanny with two 125-car ferries. That would be nice for passengers, as we'd see a higher frequency of service on route 9. It wouldn't be very cost-efficient though: it takes more money to fuel and maintain two ships vs. one.
|
|
|
Post by Dane on Aug 31, 2012 21:45:15 GMT -8
If there is a 2016 start, the design phase would have to start next year, and by 2014, bids from shipyards would have to be processed and completed. BCF has already missed the ferry (so to speak) on the original time line. I agree with that timeline, which means BC Ferries would need to business plan the capital by the end of this fiscal year or the Government would need to be forecasting for it in the next budget. Admittedly I have not read BC's budget but I certainly have not seen any indicator that they are ready to support a build project. My opinion is also strengthened by the report on BC Ferries establishment from earlier this year which still lacks a substantive response. On the "private" side of the house nothing indicates there is a real plan to move forward. In contrast four years prior to the FSG four there was considerable public information and a posted funding plan. So, this is why I think the timeline is already unlikely. Earlier in this thread there is a drawing from BCFC that shows the same forward looking public information that turned out to have no connection to reality. No doubt this is what BC Ferries would like to see. Also, the Queen of NW will be frighteningly old when retired with this plan.
|
|
|
Post by Ferryman on Sept 2, 2012 15:17:32 GMT -8
And here's what the Burnaby / Nanaimo replacement MIGHT look like (the top "Carrier Princess" style is what might happen if they do a "Like for Like replacement re vessel capacity) - the bottom 2 ships are what MIGHT replace the Bowen Class & Howe Sound Queen. I'm really liking the design for the Nanaimo/Burnaby replacement. Looks like overheight clearance will be quite high. Has BCF trashed plans for building a purposely designed Northern Discovery then? I would assume she'd look similar to the B-class replacement, but maybe with a closed car deck, and less length to reduce capacity. According to the document, they're considering a passenger-only vessel for route 9A as an alternative. I guess this would be chartered out. Also mentions potentiality of replacing the Nanny with two 125-car ferries. That would be nice for passengers, as we'd see a higher frequency of service on route 9. It wouldn't be very cost-efficient though: it takes more money to fuel and maintain two ships vs. one. Extreme dislike on the 190 AEQ design. This looks like a Princess Superior mates with Carrier Princess design to me. 190 cars, and nowhere for the passengers to go? Food and Retail is a huge money maker. So..........? That is all.
|
|
|
Post by glasseye on Sept 2, 2012 17:53:58 GMT -8
Open car deck on route #17?
That might be a bit wet in the winter.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 4, 2012 18:12:41 GMT -8
And here's what the Burnaby / Nanaimo replacement MIGHT look like (the top "Carrier Princess" style is what might happen if they do a "Like for Like replacement re vessel capacity) - the bottom 2 ships are what MIGHT replace the Bowen Class & Howe Sound Queen. I'm really liking the design for the Nanaimo/Burnaby replacement. Looks like overheight clearance will be quite. According to the document, they're considering a passenger-only vessel for route 9A as an alternative. I guess this would be chartered out. Also mentions potentiality of replacing the Nanny with two 125-car ferries. That would be nice for passengers, as we'd see a higher frequency of service on route 9. It wouldn't be very cost-efficient though: it takes more money to fuel and maintain two ships vs. one. ::)I like the two 125-car ferries idea it would maybe take away route 9A during the summer and it would be better service during the fall, winter, spring. But it would make more sense to having a one 190-car vessel servicing route 9. I like the Bowen Class and Howe Sound Queen replacement vessels which is the bottom vessels. Hey, if BC ferries replaces the Bowen Queen with the bottom ship they could do route 9A longer than, just summer only, BC Ferries could start it like in late spring to early fall like May 15 to October 15. Only if BC Ferries replaces the Nanny with one 190-car vessel.
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on Sept 4, 2012 19:53:59 GMT -8
This plan isn't worth the bandwidth it is printed on ... I think Dane is right on with his assessment. It appears that BCFS was going to a meeting with their counterparts from WSF and had to bring 'something' to make it look like they were taking the meeting seriously. It is laughable to read that in 2043/44 they 'plan' to replace the (by then) ancient Spirits with '2 x Coastal class'. By that time the Coastal class designs will be 4+ decades old. I expect firm plans for vessel replacements will not materialize until after next year's BC election. Only then will we see actual designs chosen for the remaining B's, the Bowen class, and so on.
I believe that a modified WSF's 144-car design could work on at least one BCF route (Comox - Powell River), and perhaps others. The major modification would be to go with a car deck completely enclosed at both ends. Such a vessel could work on route 9 also, though a capacity of 180 vehicles might be better suited to that route. Presumably the 144-car design could be lengthened to yield a higher auto capacity.
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Sept 4, 2012 20:06:48 GMT -8
It is laughable to read that in 2043/44 they 'plan' to replace the (by then) ancient Spirits with '2 x Coastal class'. By that time the Coastal class designs will be 4+ decades old. I do not think the meant it as "THE current FSG Coastal class". The chart separates out the various future ships into categories, and "Coastal" just happens to be the name that they used for future mainline ships.
|
|
|
Post by lmtengs on Sept 4, 2012 20:24:30 GMT -8
It is laughable to read that in 2043/44 they 'plan' to replace the (by then) ancient Spirits with '2 x Coastal class'. By that time the Coastal class designs will be 4+ decades old. I do not think the meant it as "THE current FSG Coastal class". The chart separates out the various future ships into categories, and "Coastal" just happens to be the name that they used for future mainline ships. I'm with Flug on this one...
|
|
mrdot
Voyager
Mr. DOT
Posts: 1,252
|
Post by mrdot on Sept 4, 2012 20:54:38 GMT -8
:)looking at some of the new wonderboot's from the FSG portfolio of ro-pax vessels, I can't imagine the new supersize spirit class, and what beauties they might be, but that will be beyond my horizon on this planet! mrdot.
|
|
|
Post by Mike C on Sept 5, 2012 11:37:27 GMT -8
I am getting the impression that BCF is pushing towards the double-ended designs, with the exception of it's northern services.
I am also disappointed to see that there seems to be a neglect in these designs for foot passengers (Route 9 is a foot pax-heavy route) with no substantial services. One of the many reasons the Tsawwassen was such a functional design was because it had full services on board, whilst being on the smaller end of the scale.
As for the NorAd, I do not foresee any amount of refit work or prayers to Greek gods being able to preserve this vessel to 2058.
|
|
|
Post by Mike on Sept 5, 2012 11:45:34 GMT -8
As for the NorAd, I do not foresee any amount of refit work or prayers to Greek gods being able to preserve this vessel to 2058. Well, the Queen of Chilliwack isn't even mentioned, so she's obviously expected to last till the end of time. ;D
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Sept 5, 2012 11:59:10 GMT -8
As for the NorAd, I do not foresee any amount of refit work or prayers to Greek gods being able to preserve this vessel to 2058. Well, the Queen of Chilliwack isn't even mentioned, so she's obviously expected to last till the end of time. ;D See page 7 of the PDF.
|
|
|
Post by Mike on Sept 5, 2012 12:49:40 GMT -8
Well, the Queen of Chilliwack isn't even mentioned, so she's obviously expected to last till the end of time. ;D See page 7 of the PDF. Oops, that's what happens when you only read the chart that is posted and not the PDF.
|
|
|
Post by gordon on Sept 5, 2012 15:11:38 GMT -8
The pDf lists the Spirit Class being replaced with Coastal Class . These vessels would have to be at least the same size as the current spirits wouldn't they. It certainly seems to me that they are going away from the single ended vessels on the major routes. s there any advantage maneuverability wise with the single enders as far as the Inside passage goes?
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Sept 5, 2012 15:26:38 GMT -8
It certainly seems to me that they are going away from the single ended vessels on the major routes. Why would you say that? In the chart from the PDF, they list a hypothetcal future "Coastal Class" (not to be confused with our current German-built 'Coastal Class') that is clearly marked as "Double ended ?", meaning that they are not sure if this future class will be single or double ended.
|
|
|
Post by lmtengs on Sept 5, 2012 22:07:00 GMT -8
The pDf lists the Spirit Class being replaced with Coastal Class . These vessels would have to be at least the same size as the current spirits wouldn't they. It certainly seems to me that they are going away from the single ended vessels on the major routes. s there any advantage maneuverability wise with the single enders as far as the Inside passage goes? And why would they necessarily have to be at least the same size as the Spirits? If traffic trends continue to decline and decline, and people discover that air travel might be more convenient to and from the island, maybe we won't ever see much of an increase in ferry travel. An island can only support so many people too, you know. On another note, what tells you that by the time our current Coastals are being retired, that the government won't be constructing a bridge across the strait? That time is around fifty years away, so anything could happen between now and then. Maybe a massive catastrophic earthquake will decimate the area, and leave BC's coast with less inhabitants than we currently have, negating the need for certain new ships.
|
|
|
Post by Curtis on Sept 5, 2012 23:36:54 GMT -8
It certainly seems to me that they are going away from the single ended vessels on the major routes. Why would you say that? In the chart from the PDF, they list a hypothetcal future "Coastal Class" (not to be confused with our current German-built 'Coastal Class') that is clearly marked as "Double ended ?", meaning that they are not sure if this future class will be single or double ended. Personally, I don't see many of the Future Coastal Classed vessels being Single-Enders. Perhaps the replacements for the Spirits or a future Route 30 vessel could be, but right now, I see a bunch of Coastals built similar to, but slightly different than the Coastal Trio we have now. Perhaps differences similar to the ones between the Cowichan/Coquitlam and Oak Bay/Surrey... Or to a greater extent, the Alberni
|
|
|
Post by lmtengs on Sept 6, 2012 19:21:13 GMT -8
Why would you say that? In the chart from the PDF, they list a hypothetcal future "Coastal Class" (not to be confused with our current German-built 'Coastal Class') that is clearly marked as "Double ended ?", meaning that they are not sure if this future class will be single or double ended. Personally, I don't see many of the Future Coastal Classed vessels being Single-Enders. Perhaps the replacements for the Spirits or a future Route 30 vessel could be, but right now, I see a bunch of Coastals built similar to, but slightly different than the Coastal Trio we have now. Perhaps differences similar to the ones between the Cowichan/Coquitlam and Oak Bay/Surrey... Or to a greater extent, the Alberni Weren't the Spirits only built as single-enders because people were concerned that double-enders lacked the manoeuverability to navigate the corners of route 1? Obviously it's fine, since the Coastals are now tried and true on the route, but at the time maybe there were still fears. Would single enders be cheaper to build though? They only need one set of propulsion mechanics and wheelhouse controls... on a double ender it would be like building a ship and a half.
|
|