|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Oct 6, 2016 17:57:31 GMT -8
Various Queen of Nanaimo views from September 12, 2016: - from her outside deck, while in Tsawwassen's Berth #1 just before her 10:10am weekday sailing.  . by Mike Bonkowski, on Flickr  . by Mike Bonkowski, on Flickr |
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Oct 7, 2016 19:18:46 GMT -8
A B-class feature that is distinctively "Nanaimo" - the mid ship passageway and sundeck: - September 12, 2016, passing Prevost Island on our way to Long Harbour  DSC05938 by Mike Bonkowski, on Flickr |
|
paolo
Oiler (New Member)
Posts: 1 
|
Post by paolo on Oct 31, 2016 16:40:28 GMT -8
I have a story about the a ferry I was on a long time ago, most likely the Queen of Nanaimo that could answer some questions for B.C. Ferries archive enthusiasts, but also to ask questions of people who'd have a better memory than I do as I was on that vessel before it got stretched around labour day 1972 when I was only 2 and half years old. Can anybody confirm if it used Bunker C back then? The smell blowing from the engine room that stank up the car deck was different from diesel (which smells like newspapers and pink erasers) but this ferry smelled much worse. Also, notable was the fact that I remember a bannister at the top of the rear staircase from the car deck to the passenger deck on the floor just aft of the stairs which divides from going lengthwise to going laterally usually with a wall before one turns up the last few steps with the name of the vessel on it, and the bannister is at the top of the front staircase I know in the case of Tsawassen and Sidney the bannister was only at the top of the front staircase, but I think I barely remember there was a bannister at the top of the rear staircases in the rare case of the unstretched Queen of Nanaimo (now it's a wall; like Sidney and Tsawassen had. It may have always been wall instead of a bannister if my memory if 1972 is wrong) This was an evening sailing from Departure Bay to Horseshoe Bay and there was an engine room at the bottom of the rear staircase with a blue painted bulkhead with a semicircular welding rib. All unstretched and pre stretched Spalding B.C. ferries had the same configuration and semicircular rib bulkhead at the engineers had to step over to get into the engine room, (they were on Sidney and Tsawassen, and in those they eventually got painted off white, then white, then black and at some point a step was eventually added half way up it so the engineers wouldn't trip over it getting into the engine room. I think I remember looking through the bannister at the top of the stairs looking down the staircase, through the share window in the door to the car deck at the bottom of the staircase through with I could see that blue bulkhead. I realize it's possible I saw it from the landing before the staircase divides into tow opposite directions, but I'm pretty sure I also could see if from the top; though that bannister usually only found at the top of the front staircase to the car deck (on the unstretched and pre stretched ferries there were only two staircases, not three as in the case of the Queen of Nanaimo today. There's also a wall now at the top of the rear staircase). If anybody can remember if there was a bannister at the top of the rear staircase of the Nanaimo before it got stretched I'd appreciate it.
If anybody can confirm what an oiler who lived across the street from me told me in around 1980; that the Nanaimo was the only B.C. ferry to use Bunker C, and only before it got stretched. If Anybody out there in B.C. Ferry enthusiast land could help me confirm or deny these memories, I'd appreciate it. I also hope this might answer questions other people have had about the unstretched Nanaimo using Bunker C. I hope this has been helpful and so too I hope to get some confirmation of my memories of the unstretched Queen of Nanaimo in 1972 when I was only two and a half years old. Cheers!
|
|
Neil
Voyager 
Posts: 7,311
|
Post by Neil on Oct 31, 2016 17:29:31 GMT -8
I have a story about the a ferry I was on a long time ago, most likely the Queen of Nanaimo that could answer some questions for B.C. Ferries archive enthusiasts, but also to ask questions of people who'd have a better memory than I do as I was on that vessel before it got stretched around labour day 1972 when I was only 2 and half years old. Can anybody confirm if it used Bunker C back then? The smell blowing from the engine room that stank up the car deck was different from diesel (which smells like newspapers and pink erasers) but this ferry smelled much worse. Also, notable was the fact that I remember a bannister at the top of the rear staircase from the car deck to the passenger deck on the floor just aft of the stairs which divides from going lengthwise to going laterally usually with a wall before one turns up the last few steps with the name of the vessel on it, and the bannister is at the top of the front staircase I know in the case of Tsawassen and Sidney the bannister was only at the top of the front staircase, but I think I barely remember there was a bannister at the top of the rear staircases in the rare case of the unstretched Queen of Nanaimo (now it's a wall; like Sidney and Tsawassen had. It may have always been wall instead of a bannister if my memory if 1972 is wrong) This was an evening sailing from Departure Bay to Horseshoe Bay and there was an engine room at the bottom of the rear staircase with a blue painted bulkhead with a semicircular welding rib. All unstretched and pre stretched Spalding B.C. ferries had the same configuration and semicircular rib bulkhead at the engineers had to step over to get into the engine room, (they were on Sidney and Tsawassen, and in those they eventually got painted off white, then white, then black and at some point a step was eventually added half way up it so the engineers wouldn't trip over it getting into the engine room. I think I remember looking through the bannister at the top of the stairs looking down the staircase, through the share window in the door to the car deck at the bottom of the staircase through with I could see that blue bulkhead. I realize it's possible I saw it from the landing before the staircase divides into tow opposite directions, but I'm pretty sure I also could see if from the top; though that bannister usually only found at the top of the front staircase to the car deck (on the unstretched and pre stretched ferries there were only two staircases, not three as in the case of the Queen of Nanaimo today. There's also a wall now at the top of the rear staircase). If anybody can remember if there was a bannister at the top of the rear staircase of the Nanaimo before it got stretched I'd appreciate it. If anybody can confirm what an oiler who lived across the street from me told me in around 1980; that the Nanaimo was the only B.C. ferry to use Bunker C, and only before it got stretched. If Anybody out there in B.C. Ferry enthusiast land could help me confirm or deny these memories, I'd appreciate it. I also hope this might answer questions other people have had about the unstretched Nanaimo using Bunker C. I hope this has been helpful and so too I hope to get some confirmation of my memories of the unstretched Queen of Nanaimo in 1972 when I was only two and a half years old. Cheers! You remember railings, bulkheads and welding from when you were two years old? That's quite remarkable. |
|
|
|
Post by Kahloke on Oct 31, 2016 17:55:36 GMT -8
I have a story about the a ferry I was on a long time ago, most likely the Queen of Nanaimo that could answer some questions for B.C. Ferries archive enthusiasts, but also to ask questions of people who'd have a better memory than I do as I was on that vessel before it got stretched around labour day 1972 when I was only 2 and half years old. Can anybody confirm if it used Bunker C back then? The smell blowing from the engine room that stank up the car deck was different from diesel (which smells like newspapers and pink erasers) but this ferry smelled much worse. Also, notable was the fact that I remember a bannister at the top of the rear staircase from the car deck to the passenger deck on the floor just aft of the stairs which divides from going lengthwise to going laterally usually with a wall before one turns up the last few steps with the name of the vessel on it, and the bannister is at the top of the front staircase I know in the case of Tsawassen and Sidney the bannister was only at the top of the front staircase, but I think I barely remember there was a bannister at the top of the rear staircases in the rare case of the unstretched Queen of Nanaimo (now it's a wall; like Sidney and Tsawassen had. It may have always been wall instead of a bannister if my memory if 1972 is wrong) This was an evening sailing from Departure Bay to Horseshoe Bay and there was an engine room at the bottom of the rear staircase with a blue painted bulkhead with a semicircular welding rib. All unstretched and pre stretched Spalding B.C. ferries had the same configuration and semicircular rib bulkhead at the engineers had to step over to get into the engine room, (they were on Sidney and Tsawassen, and in those they eventually got painted off white, then white, then black and at some point a step was eventually added half way up it so the engineers wouldn't trip over it getting into the engine room. I think I remember looking through the bannister at the top of the stairs looking down the staircase, through the share window in the door to the car deck at the bottom of the staircase through with I could see that blue bulkhead. I realize it's possible I saw it from the landing before the staircase divides into tow opposite directions, but I'm pretty sure I also could see if from the top; though that bannister usually only found at the top of the front staircase to the car deck (on the unstretched and pre stretched ferries there were only two staircases, not three as in the case of the Queen of Nanaimo today. There's also a wall now at the top of the rear staircase). If anybody can remember if there was a bannister at the top of the rear staircase of the Nanaimo before it got stretched I'd appreciate it. If anybody can confirm what an oiler who lived across the street from me told me in around 1980; that the Nanaimo was the only B.C. ferry to use Bunker C, and only before it got stretched. If Anybody out there in B.C. Ferry enthusiast land could help me confirm or deny these memories, I'd appreciate it. I also hope this might answer questions other people have had about the unstretched Nanaimo using Bunker C. I hope this has been helpful and so too I hope to get some confirmation of my memories of the unstretched Queen of Nanaimo in 1972 when I was only two and a half years old. Cheers! Very good questions. I don't know the answers, but I am responding to signify that I moved your post into the existing Queen of Nanaimo thread. thanks. |
|
|
|
Post by Starsteward on Nov 1, 2016 7:36:35 GMT -8
I have a story about the a ferry I was on a long time ago, most likely the Queen of Nanaimo that could answer some questions for B.C. Ferries archive enthusiasts, but also to ask questions of people who'd have a better memory than I do as I was on that vessel before it got stretched around labour day 1972 when I was only 2 and half years old. Can anybody confirm if it used Bunker C back then? The smell blowing from the engine room that stank up the car deck was different from diesel (which smells like newspapers and pink erasers) but this ferry smelled much worse. Also, notable was the fact that I remember a bannister at the top of the rear staircase from the car deck to the passenger deck on the floor just aft of the stairs which divides from going lengthwise to going laterally usually with a wall before one turns up the last few steps with the name of the vessel on it, and the bannister is at the top of the front staircase I know in the case of Tsawassen and Sidney the bannister was only at the top of the front staircase, but I think I barely remember there was a bannister at the top of the rear staircases in the rare case of the unstretched Queen of Nanaimo (now it's a wall; like Sidney and Tsawassen had. It may have always been wall instead of a bannister if my memory if 1972 is wrong) This was an evening sailing from Departure Bay to Horseshoe Bay and there was an engine room at the bottom of the rear staircase with a blue painted bulkhead with a semicircular welding rib. All unstretched and pre stretched Spalding B.C. ferries had the same configuration and semicircular rib bulkhead at the engineers had to step over to get into the engine room, (they were on Sidney and Tsawassen, and in those they eventually got painted off white, then white, then black and at some point a step was eventually added half way up it so the engineers wouldn't trip over it getting into the engine room. I think I remember looking through the bannister at the top of the stairs looking down the staircase, through the share window in the door to the car deck at the bottom of the staircase through with I could see that blue bulkhead. I realize it's possible I saw it from the landing before the staircase divides into tow opposite directions, but I'm pretty sure I also could see if from the top; though that bannister usually only found at the top of the front staircase to the car deck (on the unstretched and pre stretched ferries there were only two staircases, not three as in the case of the Queen of Nanaimo today. There's also a wall now at the top of the rear staircase). If anybody can remember if there was a bannister at the top of the rear staircase of the Nanaimo before it got stretched I'd appreciate it. If anybody can confirm what an oiler who lived across the street from me told me in around 1980; that the Nanaimo was the only B.C. ferry to use Bunker C, and only before it got stretched. If Anybody out there in B.C. Ferry enthusiast land could help me confirm or deny these memories, I'd appreciate it. I also hope this might answer questions other people have had about the unstretched Nanaimo using Bunker C. I hope this has been helpful and so too I hope to get some confirmation of my memories of the unstretched Queen of Nanaimo in 1972 when I was only two and a half years old. Cheers! First of all, welcome to the forum 'paolo', secondly maybe you should change your handle to 'memoryforhire'.  Migawd, I'm stretching things to remember what I was doing 2 1/2 days ago, but maybe that comes with aging like fine whiskey. Back in the 'Nanny's' pre-stretch days the only olfactory recollection I have of her was the overbearing smell of new paint. Paint bested diesel fumes in those days. To your query about the fleet using Bunker C fuel at specific periods of time. I "assume" that back in the early days, the fleet probably used Bunker C, before technology /engineering advances made it more environmentally correct to use a lighter grade of fuel. That said, I'd bet the farm that the thick, stinky black goo that adorned my white steward's jacket the morning the 'Queen of Prince Rupert' got too cozy with Haddington Reef which necessitated a full passenger evacuation. Life Boats and Life Rafts away! While your infant memory of the internal structure(s) of the 'Queen of Nanaimo' leave me somewhat jealous, I can agree that if someone experiences a traumatic event, chances are that ones' memory can be profoundly inscribed, and re-lived instantly, ignited by out of the blue triggers. Periodically, I'm taken back to that cold, smelly morning: Acrid Bunker C, thick salty air, heaving to and fro upon a carpet of slimy green-black kelp. And that was 49 years ago.  |
|
Nick
Voyager
Chief Engineer - Queen of Richmond
Posts: 2,080
|
Post by Nick on Nov 2, 2016 16:19:59 GMT -8
To my knowledge no BC Ferries have used "bunker C" as a fuel. What is known as Bunker C is, when cold, essentially asphalt without rocks. It's for all intents and purposes a solid. Burning it takes a lot of infrastructure aboard the ship in order to condition it and allow it to burn properly. It generally needs to be heated to at least 60C before it can be pumped and 120C before it can be atomized properly for combustion. I don't believe the Nanaimo or any other ferry for that matter has ever been fitted with the necessary equipment. Ferryman may know otherwise...
Fuels are typically produced by an atmospheric and vacuum distillation process. As the crude is heated, the different fuels evaporate at different temperatures. This allows them to be separated. Once everything has separated, the residue that is left is fed through further refining processes that extract other useful products from it. The remaining residue is sold as a residual fuel oil, or what was known as "Bunker C" or No. 6 fuel oil.
All that said, what we know as Diesel Fuel was not always the clear yellow colour it is now. What we buy as Diesel today is known in the marine world as MGO or marine gas oil. It is a blend of mostly distillate fuel (produced by atmospheric and/or vacuum distillation. MDO, or marine diesel oil, is also a blend of distillate fuel but also has some other oils mixed in, such as a small amounts of residual fuel and in some cases things like used lube oil. It is blended to keep it thin enough that it can be burned without preheating. Because of the impurities and residual oil, MDO can have a much darker appearance than MGO, and can have a stronger "crude oil" type odour.
These standards didn't really come into effect until the 1980s. Prior to that the blends of fuel were much "looser" and varied depending on the original source. All this to say I think that what "paolo" and Starsteward remember was most likely a form of MDO, or light diesel blended with some residual fuel, rather than straight Bunker C.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ferryman on Jan 23, 2017 22:16:50 GMT -8
A couple of recent pics of the Queen of Nanaimo, as seen from the bridge wing of the Salish Orca at Tsawwassen. This picture was disappointing to me in the sense that I unintentionally captured this as a square photo on my phone. But it still captures the aesthetically appealing appearance of the B-Class from a unique angle  Queen of Nanaimo arriving at Tsawwassen by Chris, on Flickr Full bow thrusters pushing to port as she spins around off the end of Berths 1 and 2  Queen of Nanaimo departing Tsawwassen by Chris, on Flickr |
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,311
|
Post by Neil on Jan 23, 2017 22:38:03 GMT -8
Chris, it looks like you were high enough to be on the bridge of a cruise ship, looking down on the wee 'Nanaimo...
|
|
|
|
Post by Ferryman on Jan 30, 2017 15:00:29 GMT -8
There are not too many things left on the Nanaimo that proves she was a vessel that was running in the 1960's. Every once in a while you find something, but otherwise alot of what proves her age are her working certificates. One of the things still around that is still used from time to time is the guestbook in the bridge. It's earliest signatures date back to 1965  |
|
|
|
Post by Starsteward on Jan 30, 2017 17:21:24 GMT -8
There are not too many things left on the Nanaimo that proves she was a vessel that was running in the 1960's. Every once in a while you find something, but otherwise alot of what proves her age are her working certificates. One of the things still around that is still used from time to time is the guestbook in the bridge. It's earliest signatures date back to 1965 May 28th 1965 would have seen the Queen of Nanaimo in her 2nd year on Route 2.
How times have changed as Bridge tours were very common in the early years. An announcement would be made at an appropriate time during a crossing, telling passengers who wished to visit the Bridge when they should make their way up to the Master's perch, and give them directions as to how best to get there. Part of the catering crew back in the day featured a green-jacketed Tourist Stewardesses who had a booth and spent the time during crossings chatting with visitors and locals alike, offering travel guide tips of all sorts. The Tourist Hosts could tell some 'very interesting' stories of all shades after finishing a watch or two. |
|
|
|
Post by Mike on Feb 7, 2017 20:32:53 GMT -8
Queen of Nanamo's classic Airchimes echoing in Active Pass.
|
|
|
|
Post by Blue Bus Fan on Feb 15, 2017 17:42:53 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on Feb 15, 2017 20:34:52 GMT -8
Queen of Nanaimo leaving Village Bay. I am posting these because she is in her last months of service for BC Ferries: Mr. Blue Bus Fan, I am pleased that the quality of your photos are much better now than was the case a few years ago. Well done. Now, you just need to work on not putting up repetitious photos. By that I mean you really needed to post only three photos, not eight. Photos 4, 5 & 6, for example, are virtually the same. You should post only the best one of that group. Same goes for the other photos. I am telling you this in hope that you will accept what I am saying as constructive. Again, the technical quality of your photos is much better, & I like that. |
|
|
|
Post by Charles on Feb 18, 2017 21:35:35 GMT -8
I found out that The Queen of Nanaimo’s whistle is composed of three stacked “KM” style whistles a KM-165, a KM-200 and a KM-250 to add up to the KM-456 that play an E-Major Chord. I knew about the whistle playing an E-major but I just found out this thanks to an assistant manager of customer relations
|
|
|
|
Post by Ferryman on Feb 25, 2017 21:36:09 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by Olympic Ferries on Feb 26, 2017 7:01:50 GMT -8
As I personally have not ridden the Queen of Nanaimo, does anyone know if passengers are allowed to stand at the front of the vessel (in front of the windows on Deck 4?) |
|
|
|
Post by Mike on Feb 26, 2017 8:08:27 GMT -8
As I personally have not ridden the Queen of Nanaimo, does anyone know if passengers are allowed to stand at the front of the vessel (in front of the windows on Deck 4?) Yes, it's only when approaching Tsawwassen that they rope off a portion of it, where they will lower the passenger walkway once docked. |
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Mar 9, 2017 12:37:39 GMT -8
When BC Ferries asks the Ferry Commmission for approval of a ship purchase, it needs to also present alternatives to the purchase.
In the case of "Route 28" (which is the new summer Port Hardy - Bella Coola route, that is supposed to start in 2018), the alternative to a ship purchase is to use the Queen of Nanaimo for 2018-2019, while a new ship is being constructed.
Like I said, it's just the official alternative, which is required when they ask to buy a ship.
Here's what was said today, in a BCFS submission to the ferry commissioner:
So presumably this is unlikely to happen (because it is more costly), but it is the official alternate plan for starting Route-28 in 2018, which the Ferry Commissioner will hopefully and likley reject, thereby approving the immediate purchase of an available used vessel instead.
|
|
|
|
Post by Starsteward on Mar 11, 2017 9:26:50 GMT -8
When BC Ferries asks the Ferry Commmission for approval of a ship purchase, it needs to also present alternatives to the purchase. In the case of "Route 28" (which is the new summer Port Hardy - Bella Coola route, that is supposed to start in 2018), the alternative to a ship purchase is to use the Queen of Nanaimo for 2018-2019, while a new ship is being constructed. Like I said, it's just the official alternative, which is required when they ask to buy a ship. Here's what was said today, in a BCFS submission to the ferry commissioner: So presumably this is unlikely to happen (because it is more costly), but it is the official alternate plan for starting Route-28 in 2018, which the Ferry Commissioner will hopefully and likley reject, thereby approving the immediate purchase of an available used vessel instead. Having read the entire report yesterday, I'm not going to comment on the political meddling by the B.C. Liberals in BC Ferry operations. The kill-a -route, start-a-route exercise is 'politics' gone wild. That said, Flugel Horn's posting of BCFS's submission to the ferry commissioner provides us with clear evidence of just how inane the 'official alternative(s)' exercise really is. The route 10 alternative could be serviced with anything that floats, meets T.C. regulations, has potable water and functioning W.C.'s.  The route 28 'alternative' proposed by the folks at BCFS is, in my humble, but experienced opinion a total, inane joke! I'm not sure there's a 'smiley' that would be appropriate and represent deploying the venerable Queen of Nanaimo on this route! Queen Charlotte Sound can be a very nasty piece of business at any time of year. Pick a season. Oh, right, we don't have to worry about 3 of them, we just have to convince the travelling public that they can rest assured of being treated to pleasant route one, two or three type transit north-bound and south-bound of this expanse of open water. Yes, and I have a slightly used four-lane divided tunnel, aka the Massey tunnel I'm selling, real cheap. Weather related sailing cancellations on routes one, two and thirty should be entered as evidence as to the perils of using a vessel like the Nanny on route 28. Reading the list of required investments to life-extend the Nanny's by two years there were, in my opinion at least 3, if not more, glaring omissions. Incorporating only two of them, would blow their proposed budget to smithereens. I'll open the floor to our learned members as to what those investments might be. Let's see if we can target items that were obviously considered, or not, to be relevant to deploying the Nanny on route 28. A clue to one of the target items: Passengers should pack a healthy supply of soda crackers in their back-packs. |
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Mar 11, 2017 9:57:17 GMT -8
Reading the list of required investments to life-extend the Nanny's by two years there were, in my opinion at least 3, if not more, glaring omissions. Incorporating only two of them, would blow their proposed budget to smithereens. I'll open the floor to our learned members as to what those investments might be. Let's see if we can target items that were obviously considered, or not, to be relevant to deploying the Nanny on route 28. A clue to one of the target items: Passengers should pack a healthy supply of soda crackers in their back-packs. I was looking for mention of watertight doors and open-water seakeeping ability, but I saw no mention of this. Does anyone in the Ferry Commissioner's office or the public or the politicians know what a ridiculous suggestion the "Nanaimo alternative" is ? |
|
|
|
Post by Kahn_C on Mar 11, 2017 21:00:34 GMT -8
I'm sure BCFC is well aware. They had to put something in as a plan B, so they picked something so crazy that no one anywhere would ever allow it to happen.
|
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on Mar 11, 2017 21:08:33 GMT -8
BC Ferries Queen of Nanaimo desperately in need of a little TLC, & not likely to get it (but who knows?) - heading across Georgia Strait bound for Tsawwassen - 1 March 2017  © WCK-JST by Jim Thorne, on Flickr |
|
|
|
Post by Mike on Mar 11, 2017 22:03:46 GMT -8
Reading the list of required investments to life-extend the Nanny's by two years there were, in my opinion at least 3, if not more, glaring omissions. Incorporating only two of them, would blow their proposed budget to smithereens. I'll open the floor to our learned members as to what those investments might be. Let's see if we can target items that were obviously considered, or not, to be relevant to deploying the Nanny on route 28. A clue to one of the target items: Passengers should pack a healthy supply of soda crackers in their back-packs. I was looking for mention of watertight doors and open-water seakeeping ability, but I saw no mention of this. Does anyone in the Ferry Commissioner's office or the public or the politicians know what a ridiculous suggestion the "Nanaimo alternative" is ? It's an upgrade over the Nimpkish because you get complimentary water wings with your potable water! |
|
|
|
Post by Starsteward on Mar 12, 2017 7:08:39 GMT -8
I'm sure BCFC is well aware. They had to put something in as a plan B, so they picked something so crazy that no one anywhere would ever allow it to happen. It is truly unfortunate that as Kahn C points out, BCFS has to play along with the shameful meddling of Christie's gang as it relates to ferry operations. The absolute drivel compiled in the pages of 'Plan B' is a an affront to anyone who has the slightest knowledge of the type of vessel required to transit Queen Charlotte Sound, when sea conditions are relatively tame. Tame and manageable sea conditions mean that the North-East swells that usually roll across a transiting vessel's path are no higher than 2 or 3 feet high. Sea conditions like that, were a delightful bonus, especially at dinner time when the QPR was on a northbound run and came into the 'QCS' at and during dinner service. Those sea conditions were few and far between when most often the grand old queen would rise up on her port side, come down in the trough, roll into the port-side wave-gap and within seconds begin the pitch and roll dance once again. Sea conditions could and did get nasty, with waves/swells 6 feet and higher the Rupert danced to rock and roll, stewards carrying heavy oval trays fully laden with main course dishes for 4 diners doing the 2-step evasion dance, lest they got bowelled over by diners on the run for the nearest W.C. just down the hall from the dining room entrance. Busboys with mop and bucket were a frequent sight IN and along the path to the LOOs.  Every second day during the Summer schedule, one's dining experience could be a challenge. ( Stewards had a nasty trick or two for rude or unruly travellers that could open up some tables rather quickly for parties awaiting tables, but 'smirk', I digress...) The Queen of Prince Rupert had a V-shaped bow door, 1.5 feet more draft than the Nanny, and was equipped with fin stabilizers, and water-tight doors on decks above the engine room and the Tween decks. BCFS should tally the total costs of creating the Plan B drivel report and ensure that those costs are included in whatever "bill" BCFS remits to Christie's gang as part of the lolly the meddlers have promised to BCFS as part of the service-rebirth of a Mid-Coast connector service that should never have been curtailed in the first place.  |
|
Migawd, I'm stretching things to remember what I 
