Neil
Voyager 
Posts: 7,311
|
Post by Neil on Sept 23, 2008 11:27:27 GMT -8
their actions are nothing short of completely reckless and irresponsible. They are now culpable in endangering lives and wantonly running a damaged vessel into an even deeper state of disrepair. They need to be held accountable for this completely negligent action. Neil: the Spirits are designed to have FOUR engines. They can run on 3 functional without any significant degradation in operations. On two engines they can run at reduced speed and "other" capacity. The prop shaft issue has been "jury-rigged" together and not fully repaired yet. It is, and this is a direct quote: "good enough until a full fix can be implemented". What we have now is a ship with NO SAFETY MARGIN. Because they are trying to "hotfix" the SoBC, they are running her on 3 engines, and at times when they are working on the down engine, the adjacent engine cannot be operated at full power. Add to that the fact that the propeller issue could still raise it's ugly head, and you are really messing with fate. A quick scan of the CurCon's shows that the initial sailing on Monday took over 2 hours to reach destination, by way that they had to go (again) the long way around, because the ship did not have sufficient power to traverse Active Pass with 2 1/2 -- 3 engines, and a "sometimes" prop - they just can't generate enough flow over the rudders to steer correctly. Is that not a safety concern? Abating it by taking a different route is a half-assed measure at best. "Hey Neil -- one of the tires on your car is losing air, and another has a bulging blister which causes it to wobble. Don't get either repaired or replaced, just drive slower. Oh and by the way, don't go on Highway-1 or Highway-99 or Highway-17 because those all had trucks loaded with nails spill part of their cargo." This is what BCFS is doing, when you boil it all down. Would you do something like this in a real life situation?? Ask yourself. You're suggesting that not just management, but the officers and engineering crew, chose to take an unsafe vessel across Georgia Strait, loaded with passengers, endangering everyone's lives. Perhaps you need to give that allegation a bit more thought. No one who has so far joined this conversation knows exactly the extent of the SOBC's problem, nor do they (we) know what the problem entails for the safe operation of the ship. With that in mind, we don't know if your dramatic auto analogy applies, and surely you'll forgive me if I maintain that you don't have the evidence to allege wanton irresponsibility and endangerment of lives. We simply don't have any valid information from an engineering perspective to back that up. |
|
|
|
Post by Hardy on Sept 23, 2008 13:11:18 GMT -8
How cut and dried do we need it to be Neil? If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck and poops like a duck, most likely it is a duck. Blowing things out of proportion, am I? Let's assume that I could be, but would you go so far as to whitewash it down to just "bad judgement"?
I am not saying that the crew/officers are making all of the decisions, although ultimately it is up to the senior crew (or at least that is the way that it is SUPPOSED to work) as to whether or not a vessel sails for safety reasons. I would suspect (again, no proof) that upper management doesn't care if the Rte-1 crossing takes 2-2.25 hours by going around, and that senior crew would not be able to refuse to sail the long way around as opposed to not sailing at all.
In fact, I feel for the crew of the SoBC being put in the position that they are in. I am sure that BCFS has made the situation as tough on them as possible, insofar as making them run an inadequate boat.
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,311
|
Post by Neil on Sept 23, 2008 13:26:09 GMT -8
Okay; if we've backed off from the most inflammatory allegations, I don't really have any quarrel with what you're saying. My assumption (which, granted, is no more valid than yours), based on the fact that BC Ferries is bottom line obsessive, is that they have engineering opinions that running the Spirit of BC part time will not lead to catastrophic failure down the road. These people may be callous to the travelling public, but I don't believe that they're willfully stupid about an asset they're planning on operating until at least 2038.
|
|
|
|
Post by Nickfro on Sept 23, 2008 13:50:46 GMT -8
Maintenance dates for the Spirit of British Columbia · 3:00 pm on Monday, September 22 until 3:00 pm on Thursday, September 25 · 3:00 pm on Monday, September 29 until 3:00 pm on Thursday, October 2 · 3:00 pm on Monday, October 6 until 3:00 pm on Wednesday October 8 For reservations or additional sailing information, visit www.bcferries.com or call 1-888- BCFERRY (223-3779). In other words....these are the days they know the tides are fast, and can't go through Active Pass... I don't think it has to do with ripping tides as much as it has to do with lower traffic volumes midweek. With less traffic they can pull the SoBC out for a few days and exclusively work on fixing the problem(s) instead of fixing and operating at the same time. Besides, a number of sailings in a day will travel Active Pass at or near a slack tide period. |
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Sept 23, 2008 14:35:17 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by Canucks on Sept 23, 2008 15:05:20 GMT -8
BCF needs to do a proofread! The fourth line down says "The Spirit of British Columbia can operate safety on three engines." Shouldn't that be safely or am I missing something?
Anyways good to hear she will get a good refit finally.
|
|
|
|
Post by Hardy on Sept 23, 2008 17:17:26 GMT -8
Rather quite amazing how many of the issues we touched on were covered in the presser. Furthermore, I think that even though we got SOME information out of BCFS, that there is still more beneath the surface that has not been revealed -- the engine rebuild is only the tip of the iceberg insofar as what is wrong with the SoBC. With the information that we have at hand from both firsthand accounts and reliable second hand sources (yes, rumours Neil, rumours!), the engine is only one of a multiplicity of repairs that the SoBC needs; hopefully (although not mentioned in the presser), they will be able to get these issues resolved simultaneously.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 23, 2008 17:59:31 GMT -8
Did they say that they be fixing one of the engine's while in service because that would get pretty dam loud.
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,311
|
Post by Neil on Sept 23, 2008 18:16:05 GMT -8
I trust that this press release allays any fears that the ship is being operated irresponsibly, or unsafely.
Hardy, I can't say this for sure, but I suspect that if someone did a survey of all the rumours we've heard from 'reliable' sources, and wherever else speculation comes from on this forum, the accuracy record would be dismal. I'm thinking, most recently, of the contributor who told us with some certainty that the Queen of Tsawwassen was scheduled to take over from the 'Burnaby, right about now. But, what the hey, it makes for good entertainment if nothing else.
|
|
|
|
Post by Hardy on Sept 23, 2008 19:35:28 GMT -8
Did they say that they be fixing one of the engine's while in service because that would get pretty dam loud. Actually Kieran, in the maritime industry (and rail industry too), it is quite common to work on power-train issues while underway, depending on the scope of the problem. With the SoBC's engine room arrangement, it IS possible to service one engine while underway, however, as one would imagine, it is more difficult to do, as tools need to be kept away, there are moving parts, hot parts and a whole host of other inconveniences. It is most certainly NOT the quickest or most efficient way to undertake major repairs -- however, if you absolutely CANNOT remove the vessel from service, it is an option to consider. Insofar as noise and heat, there is an allowance in the CBA to pay a premium rate for working in this type of environment. |
|
|
|
Post by Scott on Sept 23, 2008 22:45:56 GMT -8
Is there any "bonus" to the traveller on the longer route? Any unique sights or photo opportunities? Or just a longer, more boring trip?
|
|
|
|
Post by PCL Driver on Sept 24, 2008 4:58:29 GMT -8
More spin-doctoring from BCFS...I especially liked the part where the engine failed on Monday...someone should tell her that the engine actually failed a few weeks ago. Spirit of B.C. to sail on a four-day week Downtime will be used to repair failed engine Joanne Hatherly, Times Colonist Published: Wednesday, September 24, 2008 The Spirit of British Columbia ferry will only sail four days a week for the next three weeks in order to give B.C. Ferries' engineers time to fix an engine that failed on Monday.
The 9 a.m. sailing out of Swartz Bay was 45 minutes late arriving at the Tsawwassen terminal when one of the ferry's four engines failed, said Deborah Marshall, director of media relations for B.C. Ferries.That left the ship unable to contend with strong tidal action in Active Pass, forcing it to take a longer route south of the Gulf Islands. For the next three weeks, B.C. Ferries will continue to sail the Spirit of British Columbia Friday to Monday, but will dock it Tuesday to Thursday -- with some variation-- to allow engineers to work on the failed engine. When the ship goes in for a scheduled refit in November, the engine will undergo a total overhaul. "It can operate safely on three engines," said Marshall. The ship is expected to run on time. However, there will be two more periods of strong tidal action in Active Pass over the next three weeks, during which time the ship will again take the alternate route. Passengers should be aware that ship captains can change the route at any time and sailing of this ferry may be late as a result. The Queen of Vancouver, which ordinarily covers supplemental sailings on Fridays and Saturdays during the summer and the shoulder seasons, will take up most of the Spirit of British Columbia's weekday sailings. The Queen of Saanich will cover some trips. The Spirit of British Columbia accommodates 470 vehicles, while the Queen of Vancouver takes 338. Marshall said ferry traffic slows in the fall, so B.C. Ferries expects the Queen of Vancouver will be able to handle the load. The Spirit of British Columbia was built in Victoria in 1993. It has experienced mechanical problems twice over the summer that resulted in cancelled sailings. Three failures in the span of little more than a month -- the first Aug. 21 and second Sept. 14 -- may make it seem B.C. Ferries is beleaguered with mechanical woes, but Marshall said the corporation oversees about 500 sailings a day, and its operational and mechanical reliability is at 99 per cent. For detailed schedule information, go to the B.C. Ferries website at www.bcferries.com or call 1-888-223-3779. jhatherly@tc.canwest.com © Times Colonist (Victoria) 2008 |
|
|
|
Post by gordon on Sept 24, 2008 9:29:26 GMT -8
When is the crew training expceted to be completed on the CC , and is there any chance that she could take the SoBC's place when she is drydocked in med November?
|
|
Nick
Voyager
Chief Engineer - Queen of Richmond
Posts: 2,080 
|
Post by Nick on Sept 24, 2008 10:08:39 GMT -8
As has been mentioned before, the CC is expected to be in service in mid-October. Unfortunately, the Alberni is going out of service for refit around that time as well, and the Queen of Vancouver is scheduled to fill in for her. That still leaves route 1 a vessel short.
|
|
|
|
Post by Hardy on Sept 24, 2008 10:28:09 GMT -8
Is there any "bonus" to the traveller on the longer route? Any unique sights or photo opportunities? Or just a longer, more boring trip? Are you implying that the "privilege" of spending more time onboard a failing vessel taking in more of the BCFerries "experience" is not enough reward in and of itself?  I bet that you would be angling for a free cup of coffee or pop or something; well that affects the bottom line, and seeing that the southern trips are actually LONGER and consume MORE fuel, I would expect that BCFS will apply a SURCHARGE to passengers taking the longer southern route; I would implement this as a "Pay to get OFF" surcharge when arriving at the destination terminal. After all, as as been pointed out, BCFS is a private corporation and needs to generate revenue for it's shareholders - all these extra fuel costs to sail the long way "safely" need to be passed on to someone! |
|
|
|
Post by Hardy on Sept 24, 2008 10:30:06 GMT -8
As has been mentioned before, the CC is expected to be in service in mid-October. Unfortunately, the Alberni is going out of service for refit around that time as well, and the Queen of Vancouver is scheduled to fill in for her. That still leaves route 1 a vessel short. Route-1 in the fall usually runs 2 boat service with supplemental service on busy travel dates or holiday weekends. 3 boat service should be sufficient on this route except Thanksgiving, Rememberance Day, US Thanksgiving, Christmas holiday season. One would hope that they have most of the refit vessels out by then (read QoNW!) |
|
|
|
Post by Kahloke on Sept 24, 2008 11:16:42 GMT -8
I was just looking at the upcoming schedule, and it has QVan on Route 30 through Nov 15. If SOBC goes into drydock right after that, I would expect QVan to come back down to Route 1. Until then, I'm guessing Route 1 will continue hobbling along with a broken SOBC. Maybe when CC enters service, they can switch boats around so SOBC isn't pulling so much duty - ie. move SOVI to Tsawwassen as the #1 boat, have CC be the #1 boat out of SWB, and use SOBC as the 3rd boat on weekends and holidays.
Plus, when QVan comes back on Nov 16, it can simply take SOBC's place as the 3rd boat, and not affect the other 2 vessel assignments. Can this be done, or will crewing be an issue?
|
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Sept 24, 2008 11:35:52 GMT -8
After all, as as been pointed out, BCFS is a private corporation and needs to generate revenue for it's shareholders - all these extra fuel costs to sail the long way "safely" need to be passed on to someone! No, BCFS doesn't need to "generate revenue for its shareholders"; who are us citizens. It needs to generate revenue in order to both survive operationally with limited Gov't funding and also to show net income to the banks re its financing. To imply that it is generating revenue for its shareholder (the Gov't, therefore for us) is wrong. If it is true, then please send me my ferry dividend. That would also be implying that ferry revenues go into the Provincial Treasury to pay for other gov't expenses; again that's not true. Flugel: founding member of "Citizens for accuracy in rhetoric" |
|
|
|
Post by PCL Driver on Sept 24, 2008 18:04:53 GMT -8
Is there any "bonus" to the traveller on the longer route? Any unique sights or photo opportunities? Or just a longer, more boring trip? Are you implying that the "privilege" of spending more time onboard a failing vessel taking in more of the BCFerries "experience" is not enough reward in and of itself? I bet that you would be angling for a free cup of coffee or pop or something; well that affects the bottom line, and seeing that the southern trips are actually LONGER and consume MORE fuel, I would expect that BCFS will apply a SURCHARGE to passengers taking the longer southern route; I would implement this as a "Pay to get OFF" surcharge when arriving at the destination terminal. After all, as as been pointed out, BCFS is a private corporation and needs to generate revenue for it's shareholders - all these extra fuel costs to sail the long way "safely" need to be passed on to someone! Actually...BCFS gave away free food the first time it broke down (the infamous 4 hour trip) The next two times (that I was on it anyway) they gave away free coffee and tea... |
|
|
|
Post by Hardy on Sept 24, 2008 19:05:18 GMT -8
Actually...BCFS gave away free food the first time it broke down (the infamous 4 hour trip) The next two times (that I was on it anyway) they gave away free coffee and tea... Perhaps I need to reacquaint myself with the use of the [sarcasm][/sarcasm] tags. Although I would like to see them try to implement a surcharge and see how well that goes over ...   |
|
|
|
Post by gordon on Sept 25, 2008 8:07:54 GMT -8
When did route2 have hourly service? Has BCFS had any success in moving route#2 traffic to route#30 with the positioning of the CI at Duke Point? It seems that they are able to fill her up . |
|
|
|
Post by Nickfro on Sept 25, 2008 14:00:46 GMT -8
The Spirit of BC is presently still docked at Berth 2. The Vancouver is already 30 minutes behind schedule. It appears that the SoBC is NOT going to be put back into service for the 3pm sailing this afternoon. I would agree with this move if it's the case, as bringing her back into service for two round trips makes no sense since she's only a relief vessel tomorrow and Sunday.
EDIT: I stand corrected. The SoBC is going to run for the final two round trips, albeit starting 45 minutes behind schedule. Who knows how far behind schedule it will be at the end of the day!
|
|
|
|
Post by Hardy on Sept 25, 2008 19:15:56 GMT -8
When did route2 have hourly service? Has BCFS had any success in moving route#2 traffic to route#30 with the positioning of the CI at Duke Point? It seems that they are able to fill her up . Heya gordon -- this too is off topic for this thread -- please find the appropriate thread to post your questions in!  To tie it back in again though (and save all of our a$$e$), yes the CI has helped draw some traffic from BOTH Rtes-1 & -2 onto Rte-30. Coast Saver fares also helped. Right now, anything that can draw traffic away from the "buggered up" boats on Rte-1 is a good thing. If it were easy enough to shuffle boats around (which of course we KNOW it is NOT), then in the interim, we could shunt the CI over to Route-1 and have the Coquitlam sub into Rte-30 in the CI's place. That would fix up the shortfall of the SoBC (and thusly tie this thread back in). |
|
|
|
Post by Hardy on Sept 25, 2008 19:18:35 GMT -8
The Spirit of BC is presently still docked at Berth 2. The Vancouver is already 30 minutes behind schedule. It appears that the SoBC is NOT going to be put back into service for the 3pm sailing this afternoon. I would agree with this move if it's the case, as bringing her back into service for two round trips makes no sense since she's only a relief vessel tomorrow and Sunday. EDIT: I stand corrected. The SoBC is going to run for the final two round trips, albeit starting 45 minutes behind schedule. Who knows how far behind schedule it will be at the end of the day! Yeah, this whole idea of running a "partial" SoBC is really[/u] working out well for BCFS. Late to get back on route (no doubt they had a bit of a panic trying to put the engine room back together!) and then losing time on her crossings. Why the heck can't they just leave her out of the rotation and run the Van/Saan combo to create the needed lift on the route? This whole half-arsed effort of keeping the SoBC in service through most of her repair is a pointless attempt that seems to be throwing good money after bad. It screams "The Money Pit" (starring Tom Hanks) at me ....  |
|
Koastal Karl
Voyager
Been on every BC Ferry now!!!!!
Posts: 7,747
|
Post by Koastal Karl on Sept 26, 2008 9:55:19 GMT -8
Here is a youtube video I found on the SOBC from a passenger who was on the Aug 21st sailing when she had to go via boundary pass. It's like 13mins long.
|
|
