|
Post by YZFNick on Jun 26, 2005 20:54:27 GMT -8
Someone on the Yahoo board said it year or so back.
|
|
|
Post by Curtis on Jun 27, 2005 7:23:20 GMT -8
I think they were guessing what happened or starting a rumor
|
|
|
Post by Ferryman on Jun 27, 2005 8:33:32 GMT -8
Yeah, I was looking through the old posts and everyone was really hoping she didn't sink after she got there.
|
|
|
Post by Scott (Former Account) on Jun 27, 2005 10:00:17 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by Ferryman on Jun 27, 2005 10:15:16 GMT -8
I saw that site last year, maybe that's where she went after the incedent with the water.
|
|
|
Post by Paul on Jul 1, 2005 16:12:08 GMT -8
The sinking of the Queen of Victoria is not true.. Sadly, Last I heard she was tide up in the Dominican awaiting her fate, due to some financial issues with the new owners.
With Regard's to any B.C Ferry sinking during Transport i.e (under-tow) Was the M.V Sunshine Coast Queen. She served with the Ferry Corp for many years, until her retirement in 1976. She sat in North Vancouver water's for many year's awaiting her fate. A friend and I where able to swim out to her back in 1987. We explored the ship all day. It was kind of scary I remerber.. Being on the big ship with just the two of us. She had most of the interior still inside.. Gallay's seat's Etc. The Bridge still had intrument's but the Radar had been removed.. Funny enough, I found document's on the bridge from B.C ferry's out lining what every person from Master to deckhand, including waiters made back in the 70's.. Yes I know I could have got into alot of truble for exploring the vessel.. I was ony 17 at the time. Many year's later, I was talking with my uncle with marine Traffic contol. I told him the story of the wounderful day I had with old girl, and how close I was to getting killed swimming out to her and falling from the rope climbing up the side of the ship.. being skinny and very cold at the time.. but that didn't stop me.. haha.
My uncle shockhis head and said.. One your lucky to be alive.. that was dangerous.. But with regard's to the Sunshine coast Queen.. She was finally sold to a company in Japan for scrap. Awaiting for a deep sea tug to arrive from Japan to take the ferry to her final resting ground oversea's.. The weather on the west coast was bad.. She had been two month's long over due to weather.. and lots of pressure from the buyer.. She sailed out to sea under tow.. I believe it was the third day under-tow when a frontal weather system came up from nowhere.. The bow door's were closed and chained.. but due to the rough water's the chain's broke and bow door's craked open and she was taking on water very fast.. Due to it being dark, the deck hands from the deep sea tug were unble to measure how much she had gone under... Sinking very fast the crew had to cut the line .. she was gone in minutes..
Sunshine Coast Queen R.I.P
Paul
|
|
|
Post by Curtis on Jul 1, 2005 18:54:57 GMT -8
There goes another oldie
|
|
|
Post by NMcKay on Jul 1, 2005 20:49:08 GMT -8
yep .poor ship.
|
|
|
Post by Quinsam on Jul 2, 2005 17:39:08 GMT -8
I wonder if she is still down there, she probably is.
|
|
|
Post by Ferryman on Aug 18, 2005 23:22:45 GMT -8
Well, I'm sure if the Queen of Victoria didn't go down hill with the maintenance, she would of been pretty helpful for these last few summers. But I found an archive on the BC Transportation website stating the Queen of Victoria being sold, but we all know the reasons why of course...but the part at the end is what I thought was a little odd but interesting about the Vesuvius Queen....see if you know what I'm talking about... www2.news.gov.bc.ca/archive/pre2001/2000/4335.aspDid anyone know about what the Vesuvius Queen was doing down there?
|
|
|
Post by Bill on Oct 24, 2005 15:21:53 GMT -8
Last I heard, was in the D.R. and apparently had a fire on it. What's up to lately ? Honestly don't know.
|
|
|
Post by Dave Banks on Oct 25, 2005 17:43:17 GMT -8
OK, I'll bite. Why was the Queen of Victoria the first of the V class ships to be retired? Damage from the Russian Freighter?
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Oct 25, 2005 17:51:48 GMT -8
I think the Vic had a fire as well.
I think the BCFC management of the time thought they had surplus large ships, and her history made her the logical first one to go.
That doesn't answer your question, which is "why" was she the logical first to go. Presumably all the amenities on the 4 V-Class on Route-1 were identical. There might have been some differences in main car-deck capacity because of platform-deck usage.
So I conclude that it must have been lingering effects from the freighter-slice and from the fire.
|
|
|
Post by Balfour on Oct 25, 2005 19:15:44 GMT -8
I've been told "she just wasn't the same after the accident"
|
|
|
Post by Dane on Oct 25, 2005 22:38:38 GMT -8
The freighter was just a blip in a very effectful life of the ship. There was all sorts of "bad things" that happened too it.
But more importantly, the engines on the ship were in poor condition. That was what spelled her doom, in addition to limited capital being placed on the Vic and Van b/c there was a belief they'd be out of service by 2000.
BCFS actually commissioned a study to determine the feasability of brining the Victoria back into service, but the costs were too great and the required rebuild far to extensive for a ship they would use lightly for five years.
|
|
|
Post by hergfest on Oct 25, 2005 23:42:37 GMT -8
Well, all of the V-Class will be gone when the Super C's arrive. They might keep one around for another couple of years for a backup ship.
|
|
|
Post by Dane on Oct 26, 2005 0:48:53 GMT -8
Yes - The FastCats were going to replace the Vs under the previous scheme, and the Super Cs were still conceptualized but likely only two ships.
I am curious to see what happens with the V Class, they might need the capcity but they are old.
|
|
|
Post by kylefossett on Oct 26, 2005 14:49:49 GMT -8
weakness in the cardeck steel from the fire. or something like that is what i have heard
|
|
|
Post by Dave Banks on Nov 12, 2005 15:22:52 GMT -8
Thanks for all the replys, guys. Engines in poor shape? I thought she was re-engined at the same time as the Queen of Vancouver, was she not maintained equally?
In 2000, I took the Sunshine Coast circle trip, and did note that the upkeep on the Sidney seemed to be less than on the Tsawwassen. A lot more rust. So there's at least one case where a pair of sisters aged at different rates...
cascade, which vessels do you mean by "the first three"? I thought the first two were the Sidney and Tsawwassen in 1960, followed in '62 by the City of Victoria and the City of Vancouver
|
|
|
Post by Dane on Nov 13, 2005 0:03:18 GMT -8
Thanks for all the replys, guys. Engines in poor shape? I thought she was re-engined at the same time as the Queen of Vancouver, was she not maintained equally? In 2000, I took the Sunshine Coast circle trip, and did note that the upkeep on the Sidney seemed to be less than on the Tsawwassen. A lot more rust. So there's at least one case where a pair of sisters aged at different rates... Rust is a bad way to tell the condition of a vessel in the BCF fleet. About a year and a half ago the Spirit of Vancouver Island looked like a rust ball, just because sometimes repainting doesn't occur fast enough. It used to be annually, it no longer is. That said, the Sidney leaving was not a suprise at all, so BCF would cut to critical maint only. The Victoria was, as you said, re-engined with all the other Vs to create a long awaited standard. The vessel because of its trials and tribulations, as have been outlined here are one reason we could see poor condition in the engines. She was also very heavily used, like the others so if an incident did occur the lasting effects could have been stronger. Sometimes two equal pieces of equipment don't last the same amount of time; just look at two identical automobiles. Moreover, this list seems to have the attitude that the Victoria was "special" to have been taken out. All the Vs were supposed to have been killed off with in three years of her had the Cats worked out. (exception held to the New West)
|
|
|
Post by Retrovision on Nov 27, 2005 18:00:18 GMT -8
I haven't really been keeping up with this thread, so I don't know if this has been pointed out, but while going through Lloyds Register of Ships the other day at the library, I checked out the Queen of Ocoa, and was surprised to see her registered in Panama, not the Dominican Republic. I'm guessing this is just a cost cutting measure, as with so many cruise ships.
|
|
|
Post by Retrovision on Nov 27, 2005 18:05:13 GMT -8
(and maybe for labour reasons, as we've seen with (formerly) Paul Martin's CSL in the east)
|
|
|
Post by Retrovision on Nov 29, 2005 16:19:52 GMT -8
I've heard that acronym before; what does it stand for? (I have limitied time online while at the library)
I think I know what it means - CTV (or maybe CBC) television did an expose a year or two ago about Paul Martin's (Canada's PM) CSL (Canadian Steamship Lines) registering most (if not all) of their ships off-shore in places like Lyberia to avoid costs, labour standards and environmental concerns.
BTW, last time that I was in Victoria, I was surprised to see Clipper Navigation's ships registration being in Curacao... not really all that surprising, though.
|
|
|
Post by Scott on Nov 29, 2005 22:26:13 GMT -8
Flag of Convenience
I read somewhere that there are even countries used as FOC's that don't even have a coastline.
|
|
|
Post by Retrovision on Nov 30, 2005 18:17:43 GMT -8
"So for the Q of V having a flag from a different country - well they are just following normal shipping business."
Yeah, seems to be fairly standard now adays, from what I've heard over the years.
Reminds me, atleast in terms of environmental concerns, of how so many ships are sent to so few countries for scrapping... the ones with the lowest standards, no doubt.
I've been to a handful of cruise destination ports around N. America, The Bahamas, and Mexico, and, surprise surprise, you can cound the number of countries that all the ships are registered with on a single hand.
|
|