|
|
Post by Kahloke on Dec 5, 2011 18:19:45 GMT -8
If the New West is deployed to Route 3, it would be used as the number two vessel during the summer months, not as the off-season vessel. IF BC Ferries were to deploy New West to Route 3 in the summer as the #2 boat, which vessel would take her place on Route 1? They need 4 boats on Route 1 during the summer, right? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 5, 2011 18:24:27 GMT -8
Sunshine Coasters wouldn't be too happy about this  (I know that doesn't change anything). Although it sure would be a nice change for a ferry geek to the boring Queen of Surrey! During the off-season (November, January, February) the New West would be fine. If she can't keep the regular winter schedule, they could always use the shoulder season schedule where the ship usually has 5 extra minutes in the dock. I thought the New West could do the turnaround in an hour with her faster speed? Honestly, I doubt this will happen though. The Cowichan was refused right away so i'm sure the New West will be refused as well for whatever reason. As for the upcoming refit, the replacement will be the Coquitlam as always. |
|
|
|
Post by Mike C on Dec 5, 2011 18:26:27 GMT -8
Actually, it's not quite that simple. No BC ferry route has it's capacity determined by average load, nor does the building of any highway. Peak requirements are always taken into consideration. Correct, however it would be inefficient to produce these resources based on numbers found during a small segment of time during the day. But obviously not "traffic numbers we found during the hours of 10 pm and 4 am," as this does not support the needs of the people it's customers, and that is the sole purpose of the service in the first place. There is a fine line between service and a lack thereof, and I do not think that line would be crossed if this were to happen. There's also the matter of the Coastal Ferry Services Contract, which states that capacity must meet the numbers of the previous year's traffic figures. If, by cutting capacity by 25% over a prolonged period, BC Ferries was incurring overloads during every peak weekly period, they could be in breach of their contract with the province, unless they were granted a temporary variance by the commissioner. I based my numbers on ridership from March of last year in hopes of giving it a decent and fair shot. Another thing to remember is that BC Ferries ridership is decreasing, however it is at such a nominal annual rate that it's pretty much meaningless. We don't have the average load figures for every sailing during peak times on Fridays and Sundays. If overloads would only occur occasionally with a smaller capacity vessel, the company would be okay, but if the boat was clearly too small to meet the criteria of the contract, residents might not have to make do with your verdict of 'suck it up'. Thankfully, we both belong to a forum which has a phenomenal archive of nearly every time a major route sails near or at capacity (when BC Ferries " missed the boat again  ). I just don't foresee this happening on a regular basis. So I will poke around and have a look to see if regular overloads occured with the Surrey, then we will know for sure that this is a problem. If the New West is deployed to Route 3, it would be used as the number two vessel during the summer months, not as the off-season vessel. Buzz Killingtons. |
|
|
|
Post by Mike C on Dec 5, 2011 18:28:55 GMT -8
If the New West is deployed to Route 3, it would be used as the number two vessel during the summer months, not as the off-season vessel. IF BC Ferries were to deploy New West to Route 3 in the summer as the #2 boat, which vessel would take her place on Route 1? They need 4 boats on Route 1 during the summer, right? We are anticipating, most likely the Coastal Renaissance, which would be replaced on Route 2 by the Coquitlam. |
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on Dec 5, 2011 21:29:15 GMT -8
You may recall that route 1 (by far BCF's busiest) was being served by a Coastal plus the QoNWM during the January to March period earlier this year. If BCFS could provide that level of service on route 1, then providing the QoNWM alone on route 3 ought to be acceptable during the slowest part of the year.
And yes, single enders have been doing Horseshoe Bay since the early 1950's, and still could manage this today. With the QoNWM's speed, she ought to be able to handle the route with only a modest adjustment of the schedule.
|
|
bargain
Oiler (New Member)
Posts: 44 
|
Post by bargain on Dec 6, 2011 10:04:56 GMT -8
Sunshine Coasters wouldn't be too happy about this (I know that doesn't change anything). Although it sure would be a nice change for a ferry geek to the boring Queen of Surrey! During the off-season (November, January, February) the New West would be fine. If she can't keep the regular winter schedule, they could always use the shoulder season schedule where the ship usually has 5 extra minutes in the dock. I thought the New West could do the turnaround in an hour with her faster speed? Honestly, I doubt this will happen though. The Cowichan was refused right away so i'm sure the New West will be refused as well for whatever reason. As for the upcoming refit, the replacement will be the Coquitlam as always. Capacity issues aside I'd personally love having the New Westminster for a few months - Would be an interesting change! |
|
|
|
Post by Mike C on Dec 6, 2011 18:33:42 GMT -8
If I had any say on fleet allocation, I'd have the Queen of Alberni on Route 3 before you could say Coastal Cafe - but alas...  The Sunshine Coast residents, I am fairly sure would balk at any kind of change - if they had issues with the Cowichan, one of the closest relatives in the fleet to their beloved Surrey, I highly doubt that a modified schedule would be accepted. The Esquimalt had a 50 minute crossing time, so that would indicate a 70 minute turnaround... I seriously doubt the New West could do anything under 65. Probably would maintain 70. Route 3 is just such a short crossing that the vessel doesn't have the same kind of space to make up time as it does on Georgia Strait open water routes. And I foresee complaints arising from the wake. Horseshoe Bay is generally not well suited for single-ended ferries, despite what history indicates. Backing out of the bay causes delays to the route and other ships that require access. |
|
|
|
Post by Dane on Dec 6, 2011 19:46:40 GMT -8
Didn't the B Class operate more or less on the same schedule, in so far as turn around times on rte three? I would be surprised if there was a need for a modified schedule, but we will see.
The issue with the Alberni, like every rte except perhaps thirty is the lack of passenger space. Say what you want about people that use three complaining but thesimple fact is the walk on loads are too much for the Alberni.
|
|
Nick
Voyager 
Chief Engineer - Queen of Richmond
Posts: 2,080
|
Post by Nick on Dec 6, 2011 19:58:44 GMT -8
If I had any say on fleet allocation, I'd have the Queen of Alberni on Route 3 before you could say Coastal Cafe - but alas... The Sunshine Coast residents, I am fairly sure would balk at any kind of change - if they had issues with the Cowichan, one of the closest relatives in the fleet to their beloved Surrey, I highly doubt that a modified schedule would be accepted. The Esquimalt had a 50 minute crossing time, so that would indicate a 70 minute turnaround... I seriously doubt the New West could do anything under 65. Probably would maintain 70. Route 3 is just such a short crossing that the vessel doesn't have the same kind of space to make up time as it does on Georgia Strait open water routes. And I foresee complaints arising from the wake. Horseshoe Bay is generally not well suited for single-ended ferries, despite what history indicates. Backing out of the bay causes delays to the route and other ships that require access. I agree fully with Dane, the Alberni has far too little passenger space for route 3. While backing out of HSB will cause some delays and is certainly less efficient than using a double ender, remember that the New West has more powerful and much newer engines than the Esquimalt did, and has a solid 3 knots in top speed over the Eskie. While the New West would not be able to do the route as fast as the Surrey, I don't think the delays would be that significant. |
|
|
|
Post by glasseye on Dec 6, 2011 22:04:11 GMT -8
By my math, the QoNW could cut three minutes off the Surrey's typical trip time at the absolute maximum.
Route #3 is 10 nm give or take. Per Marinetraffic, Surrey sails the route at a typical speed of 18 knots while the highest observed speed for QoNW is 19.9 knots. Discounting time spent accelerating and decelerating at the terminals, the 2 knot difference (rounding up) over 10nm equates to a trip time gain of 3 minutes.
I don't know if three minutes is enough to turn the ship, but the fuel cost for those extra two knots will be pretty substantial and running at top speed just to keep up the schedule in good conditions would leave no scope for recover from delays.
|
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Dec 20, 2011 20:49:39 GMT -8
An unlikely combination of 3 ships at Departure Bay, in the evening of December 20, 2011. - Berth 3 has the Queen of New Westminster. Operating on Route-30, she has to use Departure Bay because Duke Point's berth has been damaged. - Berth 2 has the Coastal Inspiration. Operating on Route-30, she damaged her Duke Point berth earlier in the day and now has to use Departure Bay to unload her traffic that she's had on-board for over 5-hours. - Berth 1 has the Queen of Coquitlam. Normally operating on Route-3 and doing refit-substitution work on Route-2, she was being moored while she is between assignments. She is now being readied to operating on Route-30 on next day, because of damage to the Coastal Inspiration. A unique set of circumstances bringing these 3 ships together at Departure Bay. .....and 1 hour before these photos were taken, the Queen of Oak Bay departed here on her regular route-2 trip, and an hour after I left, the Queen of Cowichan would have arrived here on Route-2. - that's 5 different ships in one terminal, in one evening.    |
|
|
|
Post by Scott (Former Account) on Dec 21, 2011 3:01:14 GMT -8
December 20, 2011.The following images posted by this account are copyright © S.A. ~ Unauthorized use is prohibited.
 BC Ferries - Queen of New Westminster approaching Berth 3, Departure Bay. by BCFS, on Flickr  BC Ferries - Queen of New Westminster approaching Berth 3, Departure Bay. by BCFS, on Flickr  BC Ferries - Queen of New Westminster and Coastal Inspiration at Departure Bay. by BCFS, on Flickr  BC Ferries - Queen of New Westminster and Coastal Inspiration at Departure Bay. by BCFS, on Flickr  BC Ferries - Queen of New Westminster and Coastal Inspiration at Departure Bay. by BCFS, on Flickr  BC Ferries - Queen of New Westminster at Berth 3, Departure Bay. by BCFS, on Flickr  BC Ferries - Queen of New Westminster and Coastal Inspiration at Departure Bay. by BCFS, on Flickr  BC Ferries - Queen of New Westminster at Berth 3, Departure Bay. by BCFS, on Flickr More photos later today...
|
|
|
|
Post by Scott (Former Account) on Dec 21, 2011 13:41:19 GMT -8
December 20, 2011.The following images posted by this account are copyright © S.A. ~ Unauthorized use is prohibited.
 BC Ferries - Stairwell, Queen of New Westminster. by BCFS, on Flickr  BC Ferries - Henry, Queen of New Westminster. by BCFS, on Flickr  BC Ferries - Playarea, Queen of New Westminster. by BCFS, on Flickr  BC Ferries - Chief Stewards Office, Queen of New Westminster. by BCFS, on Flickr  BC Ferries - Queen of Coquitlam and Coastal Inspiration at Departure Bay. by BCFS, on Flickr  BC Ferries - Queens of New Westminster and Coquitlam at Departure Bay. by BCFS, on Flickr  BC Ferries - Queen of Coquitlam, Coastal Inspiration, Queen of Cowichan and Queen of New Westminster at Departure Bay. by BCFS, on Flickr
|
|
Mill Bay
Voyager
Long Suffering Bosun
Posts: 2,887
|
Post by Mill Bay on Dec 21, 2011 18:46:16 GMT -8
December 20, 2011.The following images posted by this account are copyright © S.A. ~ Unauthorized use is prohibited.
It's a great picture, but this night view really seems to emphasize the fact that she just doesn't look quite right anymore with that last window on the cafeteria missing.
Moderator Edit: Fixed quote. |
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Dec 23, 2011 20:22:29 GMT -8
A couple more night-shots from Departure Bay on 12/20/2011: Arriving at berth-3, doing her turn-around - not much to see except the near-empty car deck.  Leaving from berth 3  |
|
|
|
Post by Dane on Jan 4, 2012 13:03:31 GMT -8
16 Dec 2011  |
|
|
|
Post by Queen of Nanaimo Teen on Feb 1, 2012 10:33:16 GMT -8
This photo showed up on ebay, which is quite neat. We don't have too many photos that have the spirit flag on the funnel, and the dogwood at the front.  |
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on Feb 9, 2012 22:18:54 GMT -8
Queen of New Westminster near Horseshoe Bay - 9 September 1972  photo © JST - Kodachrome 72-12-9 - Nikon-VueScan by Wett Coast, on Flickr[/size] She was still in her original configuration, a few years before being stretched. She was also still serving the route she was built for, Horseshoe Bay to Departure Bay.
|
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Feb 19, 2012 17:14:47 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by Scott (Former Account) on Feb 29, 2012 16:42:20 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by Scott (Former Account) on Mar 1, 2012 22:25:59 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by ferryfanyvr on Mar 1, 2012 23:21:05 GMT -8
Scott, those are awesome shots of the New West (and of the other ships as well)! Thanks for trekking to Newcastle Island to take them.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mike on Apr 6, 2012 20:04:24 GMT -8
Queen of New Westminster bound for Tsawwassen. 
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,307
|
Post by Neil on Apr 6, 2012 20:59:56 GMT -8
The 'New Westminster is still looking really good, and it's been- what- three years since her big refit? Either they really went top drawer on her coatings then, or they're keeping her properly touched up now... or maybe both. In any event, she's looking much better than any other 47 year old ferry they've ever had.
|
|
|
|
Post by lmtengs on Apr 6, 2012 21:48:28 GMT -8
The 'New Westminster is still looking really good, and it's been- what- three years since her big refit? Either they really went top drawer on her coatings then, or they're keeping her properly touched up now... or maybe both. In any event, she's looking much better than any other 47 year old ferry they've ever had. Well considering that BCF was referring to her as being 'a brand new ship' after her refit, she better look good! |
|
(I know that doesn't change anything). Although it sure would be a nice change for a ferry geek to the boring Queen of Surrey!
). I just don't foresee this happening on a regular basis. So I will poke around and have a look to see if regular overloads occured with the Surrey, then we will know for sure that this is a problem. 
